[asterisk-dev] Zap channel naming is way too confusing

[Eric "ManxPower" Wieling]

I've never seen these sorts of channel names.  On my systems all I see 
it Zap/channel-instance

So something like Zap/23-1 for a call on channel 23.

Edwin Groothuis wrote:
> I don't believe that nobody else has an opinion about this...
> 
> On Mon, Feb 20, 2006 at 01:53:57PM +1100, Edwin Groothuis wrote:
>> Please look with me to the following output:
>>
>> -- Moving call from channel 94 to channel 110
>> -- Channel 0/17, span 4 got hangup request
>> Feb 20 13:41:43 WARNING[21081]: chan_zap.c:4789 zt_write: Unable to set linear mode on channel 110
>> -- Zap/4:110-1 is busy
>> -- Hungup 'Zap/4:110-1'
>> == Everyone is busy/congested at this time (1:1/0/0)
>> -- Executing Goto("Zap/31-1", "s-BUSY|1") in new stack
>> -- Executing NoOp("Zap/31-1", "BYE") in new stack
>> -- Hungup 'Zap/31-1'
>> -- Zap/4:111-1 answered SIP/202.83.178.2-09a1dd00
>> -- Hungup 'Zap/4:97-1'
>> -- Executing NoOp("SIP/202.83.178.2-09a7a108", "BYE") in new stack
>> -- Channel 0/1, span 7 got hangup request
>> -- Hungup 'Zap/187-1'
>> -- Hungup 'Zap/165-1'
>>
>> That is...
>>
>> - Channel 0/17, span 4
>> - Channel 94
>> - Channel 100
>> - Zap/4:110
>> - Zap/31-1
>> - Zap/4:111
>>
>> It would really make live, specially if you're trying to debug
>> issues, to be able to have one naming for it.
>>
>> Personally I think Zap/span:channel is the way to go, because there
>> you see in a blink of the eye which trunkgroup and which channel
>> you are talking about.
>>
>> So that would have been:
>>
>> - Channel 4:17
>> - Channel 4:1
>> - Channel 4:7
>> - Zap/4:17
>> - Zap/1:31
>> - Zap/4:18
>>
>> What do you think?
>