<div dir="ltr">On 4 April 2013 09:05, Ishfaq Malik <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:ish@pack-net.co.uk" target="_blank">ish@pack-net.co.uk</a>></span> wrote:<br><div class="gmail_extra"><div class="gmail_quote"><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left-width:1px;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204);border-left-style:solid;padding-left:1ex">
<div class="im">On Tue, 2013-03-26 at 07:26 -0500, Matthew Jordan wrote:<br>
</div><div class="im">> On 03/26/2013 05:22 AM, Ishfaq Malik wrote:<br>
> > Hi<br>
> ><br>
> > In asterisk 1.8.7.0, an inbound call that was transferred to another<br>
> > peer would have 2 cdr entries.<br>
> ><br>
> > In asterisk 1.8.18.0 this same activity has a single cdr entry.<br>
> ><br>
> > This is a rather large and fundamental change to be enacting halfway<br>
> > through a single family branch, was there any reason why this happened?<br>
> > It means we can't upgrade without doing significant extra development<br>
> > and testing.<br>
> ><br>
><br>
> This was most likely an unintended consequence of some other change<br>
> (most likely dealing with masquerades). Is 1.8.18.0 the exact version<br>
> when the behaviour changed?<br>
><br>
> Just so I'm clear on the scenario, what are the channel technologies<br>
> involved? Is the transfer initiated via a protocol message or via a DTMF<br>
> feature?<br>
><br>
> Thanks,<br>
><br>
> Matt<br>
><br>
<br>
</div>Hi Matt<br>
<br>
Did you ever spot/recreate the change I was referring to?<br>
<div class="im"><br><br></div></blockquote><div> </div></div>"me too" - I can confirm a behaviour change and will go try and pin down at what point it happened.<div><br></div><div>This may take me a while :(</div>
<div><br></div><div style>Steve</div></div></div>