[asterisk-dev] Proposed changes to accountcode in CDRs

[Grey Man]

On Thu, May 1, 2008 at 11:12 PM, Brian Degenhardt at Switchvox
<bmd at digium.com> wrote:
>  I'd love to get some feedback from those who are involved in CDRs and
>  billing on systems that actually do perform fancy operations such as
>  blind and assisted transfers.  Would this behavior cause any problems
>  for anybody?
>
>  cheers
>
>  Brian Degenhardt
>  Switchvox Engineer
>  Digium, Inc.

Hi Brian,

A lot of us have already recorded the significant issues with Asterisk
CDR's when transfers occur.

http://bugs.digium.com/view.php?id=11093
http://bugs.digium.com/view.php?id=11849

It's also worth noting that murf, who to date appears the only core
developer interested, already tried to improve the situation from 1.2
to 1.4 but from the CDR's for transfers are now possibly more
inaccurate.

I also raised the problem on the Asterisk-User's list as there are a
number of VoIP providers losing money.

http://lists.digium.com/pipermail/asterisk-users/2008-January/204856.html

My opinion would be that any tinkering with the CDRs without doing
coming up with a proper design first would be disasterous. The design
is not even that complicated and all the Transfer CDR problems would
be solved if a CDR was generated for each end of the Asterisk bridges
raher than one CDR per bridge which will never work since both ends
could easily be billable.

Kevin's solution was to not use Asterisk for billing which while is
probably a good one has problems in that if the CDRs are not generated
by the server with the media a whole bunch of other inaccuracies could
come in.

http://lists.digium.com/pipermail/asterisk-users/2008-January/204916.html

Regards,

Greyman.