unknown +1<br><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Wed, Feb 23, 2011 at 4:53 PM, Malcolm C. Davenport <span dir="ltr">&lt;<a href="mailto:malcolmd@digium.com">malcolmd@digium.com</a>&gt;</span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex;">
<div><div></div><div class="h5">----- Original Message -----<br>
&gt; Hi,<br>
&gt;<br>
&gt; On Wed, Feb 23, 2011 at 7:42 PM, Tilghman Lesher<br>
&gt; &lt;<a href="mailto:tilghman@meg.abyt.es">tilghman@meg.abyt.es</a>&gt; wrote:<br>
&gt; &gt; On Wednesday 23 February 2011 12:28:33 Malcolm C. Davenport wrote:<br>
&gt; &gt;&gt; What say you, community members? Would making some change to the<br>
&gt; &gt;&gt; default caller identification so as to not present &quot;asterisk,&quot; be a<br>
&gt; &gt;&gt; good thing? Or, are we garnering more benefit through our spreading<br>
&gt; &gt;&gt; of<br>
&gt; &gt;&gt; &quot;asterisk?&quot; Or, perhaps it&#39;s important to your implementation that<br>
&gt; &gt;&gt; &quot;asterisk,&quot; remain the default presentation?<br>
&gt; &gt;<br>
&gt; &gt; I suspect there&#39;s many systems which are configured presently to<br>
&gt; &gt; deal with<br>
&gt; &gt; the callerid being presented as &quot;asterisk&quot;, and changing it is<br>
&gt; &gt; likely to<br>
&gt; &gt; cause a whole new round of &quot;It wasn&#39;t broken; WTF did Digium change<br>
&gt; &gt; it?&quot;<br>
&gt; &gt;<br>
&gt;<br>
&gt; This would go to a new branch, right? Then I think changing the<br>
&gt; behavior should be just fine.<br>
&gt;<br>
&gt; Personally I would go with the simplest approach IMHO: change<br>
&gt; &#39;asterisk&#39; for &#39;unknown&#39;. Everyone is familiar with &#39;unknown&#39;.<br>
&gt;<br>
&gt; /My 2 cents<br>
&gt;<br>
&gt; Regards,<br>
&gt;<br>
&gt; --<br>
&gt; /Saúl<br>
&gt; <a href="http://saghul.net" target="_blank">http://saghul.net</a> | <a href="http://sipdoc.net" target="_blank">http://sipdoc.net</a><br>
&gt;<br>
<br>
</div></div>Yes, it would be something that would be applied for Asterisk 1.10 and forward, not something that would be applied going backwards.<br>
<br>
Thanks to you, and everyone else for their feedback thusfar.  If someone else has an opinion, please keep the discussion going.<br>
<br>
--------------------------------------------------<br>
<div class="im">Malcolm Davenport<br>
Digium, Inc. | Senior Product Manager<br>
</div><div class="im">445 Jan Davis Drive NW - Huntsville, AL 35806 - US<br>
Tel/Fax: +1 256 428 6252<br>
<a href="mailto:malcolmd@digium.com">malcolmd@digium.com</a><br>
<br>
<br>
</div><div><div></div><div class="h5">--<br>
_____________________________________________________________________<br>
-- Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by <a href="http://www.api-digital.com" target="_blank">http://www.api-digital.com</a> --<br>
<br>
asterisk-dev mailing list<br>
To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit:<br>
   <a href="http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-dev" target="_blank">http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-dev</a></div></div></blockquote></div><br>