[asterisk-dev] extra dahdi dialing format? [was: Re: [svn-commits] rmudgett: branch rmudgett/dahdi_deflection r224027 - /team/rmudgett/dahdi_def...]

[Tzafrir Cohen]

On Wed, Oct 14, 2009 at 11:38:38AM -0500, Richard Mudgett wrote:
> Q.931 indicates that you should dial one way or the other with the preference to using the called number ie as not all switches or networks will support/use the keypad facility ie.  Normally, you would be dialing one way or the other so it would not look any different:
> Dial(DAHDI/g1/K1234) will send 1234 in the keypad facility ie.
> Dial(DAHDI/g1/5551212) will send 5551212 in the called number ie.
> 
> Only if you REALLY needed to dial with keypad facility and called number digits at the same time would it look different:
> Dial(DAHDI/g1/K1234/5551212)
> 
> There is also the type-of-number prefix characters, NPI prefix characters, strip most-significant-digits option, and strip dial-plan-prefix-digits option that already can cause parsing ambiguity when they interact:
> Dial(DAHDI/g1/Ue5551212)
> Parsing the keypad digits before looking for a normal extension avoids that mess.
> 
> Swapping the keypad digits and normal extension could cause the dial string to look something like this to avoid ambiguity:
> Dial(DAHDI/g1//1234)

Use case to keep in mind: those poor bastards that use GUIs.

-- 
               Tzafrir Cohen
icq#16849755              jabber:tzafrir.cohen at xorcom.com
+972-50-7952406           mailto:tzafrir.cohen at xorcom.com
http://www.xorcom.com  iax:guest at local.xorcom.com/tzafrir