[asterisk-users] Question about "null routing" calls to DIDs we don't handle

[Jesse Thompson]

(reposted with correct subject line, I think messing up the subject
line last time prevented my question from being read. Cheers :)

On Thu, Jun 2, 2011 at 12:27 PM, Jesse Thompson <jesset at gmail.com> wrote:
>> Letting a carrier use you as a carrier seems like quite a bad idea generally..
>
> I think I would agree. :)
>
>
>>
>> _NXXNXXXXXX => Dial(SIP/${EXTEN}@upstream,120); // numbers not handled here get routed upstream....
>> in the 'local' context instead of the other one?....
>>
>
> So here is where the finer points of Asterisk pattern matching must
> come into play.
>
> All of the customer DID's match the pattern _NXXNXXXXXX. If we put
> that pattern in the local context, then wouldn't that mean that calls
> from a local customer to another local customer would match the
> _NXXNXXXXXX pattern before even trying to match against the specific
> patterns in the "clients" context? We need to be able to route
> local-to-local calls without using two trunks to go back and forth
> through the upstream provider.
>
> Thank you for your input. I know this is a problem most operators can
> get past, so there's got to be just something not lining up quite
> right in my mental model. :)
>
> - - Jesse
>