[asterisk-users] Acceptance testing of a new PRI

[Jay R. Ashworth]

On Fri, Jul 25, 2008 at 10:57:49PM +0300, Tzafrir Cohen wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 25, 2008 at 01:54:21PM -0400, Jay R. Ashworth wrote:
> > On Thu, Jul 24, 2008 at 04:35:33PM +0300, Tzafrir Cohen wrote:
> > > What's wrong with plain old Zap/NN ?
> > > 
> > > [test]
> > > exten => _6XXX.,1,Dial(Zap/{EXTEN:1:3}/${EXTEN:4})
> > > 
> > > Now call 6<chan_num><number-to-dial> in context test.
> > 
> > As it happens, Asterisk 1.2 apparently will not recognize 'Zap/01-1' as
> > the argument to Dial, I get CHANUNAVAIL.
> 
> Zap/01-1 ??? How come?
> 
> Zap/01 is valid and equivalent to Zap/1 .

And yet, feeding it to Dial didn't work, and stripping the 0 off did.

I'm on 1.2 if that makes a diff.

> > So I guess I need finally to end up with 
> > 
> > exten => _88XX1NXXNXXXXXX,1,AGI(call_log.agi,${EXTEN})
> > exten => _88XX1NXXNXXXXXX,2,Dial(Zap/${EXTEN:2:2}-1/${EXTEN:4},30,o)
> 
> Err.. that's not mine. It seems like a dial-by-span syntax.
> 
> Just remove the '-1' .

Well, it worked, but ok, I'll take it off.

> > Now to figure out how to do it across IAX channels from one server to
> > another.

Which I have, but I haven't tested it yet.

Cheers,
-- jra
-- 
Jay R. Ashworth                   Baylink                      jra at baylink.com
Designer                     The Things I Think                       RFC 2100
Ashworth & Associates     http://baylink.pitas.com                     '87 e24
St Petersburg FL USA      http://photo.imageinc.us             +1 727 647 1274

	     Those who cast the vote decide nothing.
	     Those who count the vote decide everything.
	       -- (Josef Stalin)