[Asterisk-Users] AbsoluteTimeout Inside A Macro

[Christopher L. Wade]

Christopher L. Wade wrote:
> Hi all,
> 
> Is it just me and not reading the docs right, or has anybody else had 
> problems with the AbsoluteTimeout application and the 'T' extension when 
> used inside a macro?
> 
> [macro-attended]
> ; ARG1 is the device to dial out on, SIP or Zap, or whatever
> ; ARG2 is the extension to dial using 'attended' dialing
> exten => s,1,AbsoluteTimeout(30)
> exten => s,2,AGI(attended-extension,${ARG1},${ARG2})
> ; attended-extension takes a device string and an extension
> ; and builds a dial string according to some crazy internal logic
> exten => s,3,Dial(${DIALSTRING},5,t)
> exten => s,4,Goto(s-${DIALSTATUS},1)
> 
> exten => s-NOANSWER,1,Goto(s,1)
> 
> exten => T,1,NoOp("i got here here")
> exten => T,2,Goto(s,1)
> 
> The purpose of this macro is to be able to say something like
> 
> exten => _8XX,1,Macro(attended,SIP,${EXTEN})
> 
> and have the the dialed extension rung, then, if no answer within 5 
> seconds, have the dialed extension plus an 'attendant' for that 
> extension rung, (etc. etc. etc.).  If nobody answers after 30 seconds, 
> the caller is (read 'will be') offered the chance to leave a voicemail, 
> otherwise re-enter the loop, ringing the 'full' attendant list for the 
> requested extension.
> 
> When I test this, everything works according to plan, except when 
> AbsoluteTimeout expires, my T extension inside the macro is not 
> executed, the call is simply hungup.  What am I doing wrong?
> 
> 
> Thanks,
> Chris
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Asterisk-Users mailing list
> Asterisk-Users at lists.digium.com
> http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
> To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit:
>   http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users

Anybody?

Right now I'm considering doing this inside an AGI app, but I don't like 
the way Dial is 'blocking' (AGI or not).  I guess I could use chan_local 
in my dial string inside the AGI to make it 'fork' but that just creates 
a whole new ball of ear wax to deal with. :(

This 'bug' seams strange though, because I've seen examples that, at 
least to my eyes, appear exactly the same as my above code.

Any help would be appreciated.

Thanks,
Chris