[asterisk-dev] [Code Review] 2992: stasis_channels: Don't give preference to ANI information when publishing caller ID name and number

[rmudgett]

-----------------------------------------------------------
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviewboard.asterisk.org/r/2992/#review10115
-----------------------------------------------------------

Ship it!


Ship It!

- rmudgett


On Nov. 3, 2013, 12:09 a.m., Matt Jordan wrote:
> 
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
> https://reviewboard.asterisk.org/r/2992/
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> 
> (Updated Nov. 3, 2013, 12:09 a.m.)
> 
> 
> Review request for Asterisk Developers.
> 
> 
> Repository: Asterisk
> 
> 
> Description
> -------
> 
> When publishing channel snapshots, we currently compute the caller ID name and number by giving preference first to ani.{name|number}, then to id.{name|number}. However, when a channel driver (such as chan_sip) updates the caller ID, it typically only updates the caller ID stored in id.{name|number}. This means that we are currently giving preference to stale information.
> 
> When looking at the rest of the code base, the only other place where we appear to use this same logic is in app_amd. Everywhere else, we treat the party information in ani as being separate to the party information in id.
> 
> This patch publishes only the caller ID name and number in the snapshot field for caller_name and caller_num. Note that the information in ANI is still available in caller_ani.
> 
> 
> Diffs
> -----
> 
>   /branches/12/main/stasis_channels.c 402448 
> 
> Diff: https://reviewboard.asterisk.org/r/2992/diff/
> 
> 
> Testing
> -------
> 
> The failing tests bridge/connected_line_update and bridge/transfer_failure now pass. Previously, upon updating caller ID information, the number portion published was the previous caller ID number; with this patch the caller ID number is now correct.
> 
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Matt Jordan
> 
>

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.digium.com/pipermail/asterisk-dev/attachments/20131104/300fbdba/attachment.html>