[asterisk-dev] [Code Review] DTMF CallerID detection problems

[David Vossel]

-----------------------------------------------------------
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviewboard.asterisk.org/r/634/#review1940
-----------------------------------------------------------

Ship it!


Great job!  The code looks solid, just had one comment. 


/branches/1.4/channels/chan_dahdi.c
<https://reviewboard.asterisk.org/r/634/#comment4174>

    Is it worth making an #defines for this value since it is hardcoded several places?


- David


On 2010-04-29 11:30:49, rmudgett wrote:
> 
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
> https://reviewboard.asterisk.org/r/634/
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> 
> (Updated 2010-04-29 11:30:49)
> 
> 
> Review request for Asterisk Developers.
> 
> 
> Summary
> -------
> 
> The code handling DTMF CallerID drops digits on long CallerID numbers and
> may timeout waiting for the first ring with shorter numbers.
> 
> The DTMF emulation mode was not turned off when processing DTMF CallerID.
> When the emulation code gets behind in processing the DTMF digits it can
> skip a digit.
> 
> For shorter numbers, the timeout may have been too short.  I increased it
> from 2 seconds to 4 seconds.  Four seconds is a typical time between rings
> for many countries.
> 
> 
> This addresses bugs 16460 and AST-334.
>     https://issues.asterisk.org/view.php?id=16460
>     https://issues.asterisk.org/view.php?id=AST-334
> 
> 
> Diffs
> -----
> 
>   /branches/1.4/channels/chan_dahdi.c 260067 
> 
> Diff: https://reviewboard.asterisk.org/r/634/diff
> 
> 
> Testing
> -------
> 
> I had some recordings of a customer DTMF CID for a similar issue.  I hacked a version of Asterisk to send the recording during the Caller ID.  Without the patch the recorded Caller ID lost digits.  With the patch the digits were no longer lost.
> 
> The issue reporter tested the v1.6.2 version of the patch with success.
> 
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> rmudgett
> 
>