[asterisk-dev] SIP disconnect code

[Chris Tooley]

On Mon, Jul 21, 2008 at 12:57 PM, Carles Pina i Estany <carles at pina.cat> wrote:
>
>
> Hi,
>
> On Jul/21/2008, Tilghman Lesher wrote:
>> On Monday 21 July 2008 10:26:11 Tim Ringenbach wrote:
>> > On Sat, Jul 19, 2008 at 5:46 PM, Carles Pina i Estany <carles at pina.cat>
>> wrote:
>> > > hangup_sip2cause function could give the same HANGUPCAUSE for more
>> > > than one SIP disconnect reason, like in the trunk version 481 and 482
>> > > SIP codes will return AST_CAUSE_INTERWORKING (defined in
>> > > include/asterisk/causes.h, Q.931 disconnect codes).
>> > >
>> > > Because sometimes I need to know the SIP disconnect code, I don't see
>> > > any reason that we don't have a SIPHANGUPCAUSE with the SIP reason (404,
>> > > 604, etc.) so I'm thinking to implement and send the patch.
>> >
>> > I would be interested in this, and I wouldln't mind having the message
>> > set in another variable too.
>> >
>> > Someone mentioned it wouldn't make sense if multiple outbound channels
>> > were called at once. What does asterisk do with HANGUPCAUSE now if
>> > there are multiple outbound calls?
>> >
>> > I disagree with the idea that it violates the protocol neutral design.
>> > IMO, one needs to provider both a HANGUPCAUSE and a
>> > TECHxxxHANGUPCAUSE. Then you can recommend that things rely on
>> > HANGUPCAUSE, but the power to access exactly what happened isn't lost
>> > and can be used for those special cases that need it.
>>
>> Or HANGUPCAUSETEXT, a freeform text field that may contain just about
>
> I like this idea, and I think that Philipp Kempgen likes too.
>
> Probably next days (or in one week) I will work on it and say something
> here.
>
> I don't know if I will work with 1.4 branch or 1.6. Maybe it's better
> with 1.6? (I haven't tested at all...)

It's highly unlikely that it'll be accepted in anything other than trunk.