[asterisk-dev] Violent Objections? CDR dst/dcontext probs in 1.4+ when a macro is involved.

David Boyd dboyd at ignitetrx.com
Thu Jun 28 14:07:30 CDT 2007

On Thu, 2007-06-28 at 13:32 -0500, Tilghman Lesher wrote:
> On Thursday 28 June 2007 12:28, Steve Murphy wrote:
> > May I do this? Any violent objections?
> I violently object.  The CDRs are supposed to reflect exactly certain
> channel settings.  When you make a change in the channel, the CDR is
> thus updated.  While we have created the ability for you to have
> arbitrary CDR variables, the core information should remain unaltered,
> more for sanity's sake (i.e. you might change something in the CDR, then
> the channel is altered, and your change to the CDR is overwritten with
> new channel information) than for any other reason.  We do NOT want to
> go down this route, which will then create the need to "protect" CDR
> variables which have been altered by the CDR() dialplan function (and
> "unprotect" them in certain circumstances, etc.)  This is likely to get
> messy, whereas prohibiting their change (current behavior) is simple
> and clean.
> I would strongly suggest that you use the following logic in the Macro:
> [macro-whatever]
> exten => s,1,Goto(${MACRO_EXTEN},1)
> exten => _NXX-XXXX,1,Whatever()
> ...
> This will ensure that you get the dst that you desired to have in your
> CDR, should the call end while the Macro is executing.
> Over the long haul, Macro will be going away completely, which will
> resolve this little nastiness anyway.

I am unsure as to why you violently object to a move that allows people
more flexibility to perform an action they warrant as needed. The caveat
is user beware, you can change things that will break your CDR recording
efforts. The change as I understand it is not to force something on
anyone, it is  an opening of restrictions that would only be used when
the user saw fit. If my understanding is not correct would you please
let me know where I have it wrong.


More information about the asterisk-dev mailing list