[asterisk-bugs] [JIRA] (ASTERISK-27946) Increase AST_MAX_EXTENSION & AST_CHANNEL_NAME length

[Kevin Harwell (JIRA)]

    [ https://issues.asterisk.org/jira/browse/ASTERISK-27946?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=243992#comment-243992 ] 

Kevin Harwell commented on ASTERISK-27946:
------------------------------------------

I'm not entirely sure if increasing the size of those values would help here.

Also if you can post an example dialplan (steps to duplicate) along with a debug log [1] it might shed some more light on the problem and help distinguish this from a bug vs an improvement.

Thanks!

[1] https://wiki.asterisk.org/wiki/display/AST/Collecting+Debug+Information

> Increase AST_MAX_EXTENSION & AST_CHANNEL_NAME length
> ----------------------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: ASTERISK-27946
>                 URL: https://issues.asterisk.org/jira/browse/ASTERISK-27946
>             Project: Asterisk
>          Issue Type: Improvement
>      Security Level: None
>          Components: Applications/app_dial
>    Affects Versions: 15.4.1
>            Reporter: Joshua Elson
>              Labels: pjsip
>
> We are seeing more issues in what we'd consider "normal" circumstances where Dial strings are exceeding AST_MAX_EXTENSION and AST_CHANNEL_NAME length, currently set to 80.
> In particular, PJSIP_DIAL_CONTACTS expansion is often producing dial strings such as these:
> PJSIP/102-RelativelyLongStringName/sip:102-RelativelyLongStringName at 100.100.100.190:11881;transport=TCP
> When called by Page application - Page(${PJSIP_DIAL_CONTACTS(${EXTEN})}) - for instance, this ends up getting cut off awkwardly and producing failed dial attempts:
> dial.c: Called 102-RelativelyLongStringName/sip:102-RelativelyLongStringName at 100.100.100.190:11
> Would raising AST_MAX_EXTENSION from 80 to 100 or something slightly more be an acceptable solution here?



--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.2#6252)