[asterisk-dev] Proposed changes to accountcode in CDRs

[Grey Man]

On Thu, May 8, 2008 at 6:08 PM, Brian Degenhardt <bmd at digium.com> wrote:
>
>  Let's put aside the complete issue of CDRs for a moment though and
>  focus specifically on accountcodes.  Can you see any problem with not
>  implicitly transfering the accountcode from one channel to another
>  when a bridge occurs?

Yes I would see that as a problem. I would think the accountcode
should always be promulgated to both the channels in the bridge. It
would be a problem if a CDR for a call ended up without an
accountcode. However this is not something that is a problem at the
moment so I'm not sure where this issue has come from?

> I agree 100%.  This is exactly the reason I'm asking the list to
> examine these design changes to the behavior of accountcode before making
> them.  I'd love your feedback on this change.

There were cases in the Asterisk 1.0.x days where the accountcode
would not get set on an authenticated call. I never really narrowed
down why and I don't know if the behaviour is still there. The
consequence was that we explicitly set the accountcode for each
channel based on the channel name (we use the channel name to pare teh
authenticated username and look up the accountcode). I think it would
be controversial behaviour if you are talking about changing the
accountcode on a channel without an explicit dialplan command being
used, say in response to a transfer condition or such. If that's what
the suggestion is?

> Thanks for your input.  I was getting a little worried there when
> nobody initially responded.

I'll talk to you all day about Asterisk CDR's if you want :-). It's by
the far the biggest problem with my Asterisk deployment although that
is specifically related to Transfers and CDRs.

Regards,

Greyman.