[asterisk-users] Blind transfer 3/4 digits

Fabio folist at trestech.com.ar
Sun Sep 3 15:36:11 MST 2006

Hi all,

Ronald, if you are using #, try adjusting the "featuredigittimeout"
parameter in features.conf.This is the max time between digits for feature
activation. If is small, * could dial the wrong number, in your case 601
instead of 6014.

I think that you are not using # while your are using snom, because you said
that you needed to dial # in order to finish the transfer (this it's no
necessary for *). Or snom is catching the # and driving the transfer.


-----Mensaje original-----
De: asterisk-users-bounces at lists.digium.com
[mailto:asterisk-users-bounces at lists.digium.com]En nombre de Ronald
Enviado el: Sábado, 02 de Septiembre de 2006 10:40 p.m.
Para: Asterisk Users Mailing List - Non-Commercial Discussion
Asunto: Re: [asterisk-users] Blind transfer 3/4 digits

Tim St. Pierre wrote:
> Are you using # to transfer?  If so, it's not sending it as a new call,
> just sending asterisk digits using whatever DTMF mode.  Asterisk parses
> based on a "first match" in the dialplan.  Make sure that the longer
> extension numbers are loaded first in the dialplan.

That is a good thought. I can remember that the docs said that you
cannot force the order of the dialplan, except with includes. I will try
that way.
However, I have doubts as well. If you are right, than why snom phone
does not have this problem? Would not here also the first match count?


> -Tim
> On September 2, 2006 20:12, Ronald Wiplinger wrote:
>> Kevin Smith wrote:
>>> Dialing a number and transferring a number are two different things.
>>> And no offense, you are not really providing a lot of details along
>>> with your problem. So you can dial the numbers but not transfer from
>>> one to the other.
>> I was not thinking that it would be too much difference. Therefore I
>> also do not know what more info could help to distinguish the problem. I
>> hardly can post my entire configuration.
>>> What does the CLI say when you try the transfer? That would provide a
>>> lot of information that could clue you in to what is going on.
>> You hit another problem with that. I hardly see here anything anymore.
>> The messages fly by so fast, .... Especially annoying messages:
>>  chan_sip.c:10888 handle_request_register: Registration from
>> '<sip:>' failed for '' - Username/auth name
>> mismatch
>>  -- Got SIP response 486 "Busy Here" back from
>>  -- Got SIP response 400 "Bad Request" back from xx.xx.xx.126
>> NOTICE[5936]: chan_sip.c:9600 handle_response_register: Failed to
>> authenticate on REGISTER to '1747xxxxx at proxy01.sipphone.com' (Tries 3)
>> .....
>> It would be nice to "filter" the CLI for such investigation for a moment.
>>> What type of phones are you using? Some phones have the ability to
>>> pattern match and wait for a certain number of seconds before sending
>>> the number to asterisk. For example. On our Polycom phones a user has
>>> 3 seconds (between digits) to enter in 10 digits. This could be where
>>> most of your problem is.
>> That is a very good point and I will contact the manufacturer of these
>> no-name phones.
>>> My guess the problem lies with the Phones, not Asterisk form the
>>> information you provided.
>> I disagree with that! Why Asterisk treats dialing and transfer
>> different. That makes not really sense, does it?
>> bye
>> Ronald
>>> Kevin
>>> Ronald Wiplinger wrote:
>>>> David Gagnon wrote:
>>>>> Ronald,
>>>>>     You seem to be a little bit angry about VoIP. If so, I could give
>>>>> you my old Nortel system. Does this would make you happy?
>>>>> David
>>>> David,
>>>> I am not angry about VoIP, but please send my your old Nortel system
>>>> !!!!!
>>>> I just do not understand why I can DIAL 601 and 6014, but not use
>>>> blind transfer. Is the question too difficult?
>>>> I am sure there is somewhere a switch to say, wait two seconds (as
>>>> for dialing) before you assume it is a complete number.
>>>> It is also strange that snom phone can do it correct, because it uses
>>>> the ok key.
>>>>> -----Message d'origine-----
>>>>> De : asterisk-users-bounces at lists.digium.com
>>>>> [mailto:asterisk-users-bounces at lists.digium.com] De la part de Ronald
>>>>> Wiplinger
>>>>> Envoyé : 2 septembre 2006 04:20
>>>>> À : Asterisk Users Mailing List - Non-Commercial Discussion
>>>>> Objet : Re: [asterisk-users] Blind transfer 3/4 digits
>>>>> Anthony Rodgers wrote:
>>>>>> With respect, the problem is with your numbering plan......
>>>> This answer is therefore totally nonsense !!! (With all respect!!!)
>>>> Both answers have actually not lead to any step further, but to more
>>>> messages. I use to refer to such answers as NON-ANSWERS.
>>>> Please only reply if and really only if you know a solution for the
>>>> problem! Thanks for your understanding.
>>>> bye
>>>> Ronald - again, I am not angry at all.
>>>>> WHERE do you see a problem in the numbering plan?????
>>>>> I see the problem in ASTERISK, because it does not wait for the last
>>>>> digit!!!
>>>>> Where can I set that it waits for it?
>>>>> The beauty on voip IS that you can have different length and
>>>>> overlapping, ....
>>>>> bye
>>>>> Ronald
>>>>>> CP
>>>>>> On 1-Sep-06, at 10:37 PM, Ronald Wiplinger wrote:
>>>>>>> I found a problem in blind transfer:
>>>>>>> I have an extension number 601 and I have an extension 6014 !!!!
>>>>>>> If I get a call on 615 (snom) and transfer to 6014 it works, since
>>>>>>> snom
>>>>>>> requires me to hit "ok"
>>>>>>> If I get a call on 601 and transfer to 6014, than 601 will get the
>>>>>>> busy
>>>>>>> signal and I hang up as usually with transfer.
>>>>>>> Howerver the caller get the announcements: I could not get that,
>>>>>>> What could be the problem ?
>>>>>>> bye

--Bandwidth and Colocation provided by Easynews.com --

asterisk-users mailing list
To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit:

More information about the asterisk-users mailing list