[asterisk-users] CallerID inconsistently presented through ISDN/cellular networks

Wed Nov 9 01:11:15 CST 2011

2011/11/8 Richard Mudgett <rmudgett at digium.com>

> > > As promised, here is a follow up on my quest to get CallerID
> > > correctly
> > > presented when forwarding calls to cellphones.
> > >
> > > Here is a reminder of the issue at hand:
> > >
> > > Alice (GSM handset) calls Bob (ISDN-connected Asterisk extension)
> > > which forwards to Cory (GSM handset)
> > > What I would like to get is to see Alice's number (not Bob's number)
> > > presented to Cory.
> > > Sometimes, I get Alice's number, sometimes, I get Bob's number (new
> > > findings from last sunday trials).
> > > And of course, if Daniel or Eric would call Bob, the CallerID number
> > > presented to Cory would either be Daniel's number, Eric's number or
> > > Bob's number depending on a root cause I'm looking after for several
> > > days now.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > To check if CallerID is filtered or controlled by Telco, I
> > > originated
> > > calls from Asterisk using hand crafted caller ids: any CallerID was
> > > correctly presented.
> > > So I originally thought the root cause I'm after is a telco
> > > equipment
> > > switching ANI and CID.
> > > But a close look at some last trials output makes me asking for
> > > opinions from this list readers.
> > >
> > > Here follows, the anonymized (and hand indented) output of command
> > > PRI
> > > debug command.
> > > I focused on the end of call setup dialog.
> > >
> > > For the successfully presented call, the output is:
> > > [Nov 6 09:32:07] VERBOSE[27954] chan_dahdi.c: > [6c 0b 21 83 37 38
> > > 36
> > > XX XX XX XX XX XX]
> > > [Nov 6 09:32:07] VERBOSE[27954] chan_dahdi.c: > Calling Number
> > > (len=13) [ Ext: 0 TON: National Number (2) NPI: ISDN/Telephony
> > > Numbering Plan (E.164/E.163) (1)
> > > [Nov 6 09:32:07] VERBOSE[27954] chan_dahdi.c: > Presentation:
> > > Presentation allowed of network provided number (3) '78649XXXX' ]
> > > [Nov 6 09:32:07] VERBOSE[27954] chan_dahdi.c: > [70 0b 80 30 36 37
> > > 31
> > > XX XX XX XX XX XX]
> > > [Nov 6 09:32:07] VERBOSE[27954] chan_dahdi.c: > Called Number
> > > (len=13)
> > > [ Ext: 1 TON: Unknown Number Type (0) NPI: Unknown Number Plan (0)
> > > '067100XXXX' ]
> > > [Nov 6 09:32:07] VERBOSE[27954] chan_dahdi.c: > [74 0e 21 01 8f 33
> > > 33
> > > 33 34 34 XX XX XX XX XX XX]
> > > [Nov 6 09:32:07] VERBOSE[27954] chan_dahdi.c: > Redirecting Number
> > > (len=16) [ Ext: 0 TON: National Number (2) NPI: ISDN/Telephony
> > > Numbering Plan (E.164/E.163) (1)
> > > [Nov 6 09:32:07] VERBOSE[27954] chan_dahdi.c: > Ext: 0 Presentation:
> > > Presentation permitted, user number passed network screening (1)
> > > [Nov 6 09:32:07] VERBOSE[27954] chan_dahdi.c: > Ext: 1 Reason:
> > > Forwarded unconditionally (15)
> > > [Nov 6 09:32:07] VERBOSE[27954] chan_dahdi.c: '3334436XXXX' ]
> > > [Nov 6 09:32:07] VERBOSE[27954] chan_dahdi.c: > [a1]
> > > [Nov 6 09:32:07] VERBOSE[27954] chan_dahdi.c: > Sending Complete
> > > (len=
> > > 1)
> > >
> > >
> > > For the unsuccessfully presented call, the output is:
> > > [Nov 6 09:25:29] VERBOSE[27927] chan_dahdi.c: > [6c 0b 21 83 36 37
> > > 38
> > > XX XX XX XX XX XX]
> > > [Nov 6 09:25:29] VERBOSE[27927] chan_dahdi.c: > Calling Number
> > > (len=13) [ Ext: 0 TON: National Number (2) NPI: ISDN/Telephony
> > > Numbering Plan (E.164/E.163) (1)
> > > [Nov 6 09:25:29] VERBOSE[27927] chan_dahdi.c: > Presentation:
> > > Presentation allowed of network provided number (3) '67854XXXX' ]
> > > [Nov 6 09:25:29] VERBOSE[27927] chan_dahdi.c: > [70 0b 80 30 36 37
> > > 31
> > > XX XX XX XX XX XX]
> > > [Nov 6 09:25:29] VERBOSE[27927] chan_dahdi.c: > Called Number
> > > (len=13)
> > > [ Ext: 1 TON: Unknown Number Type (0) NPI: Unknown Number Plan (0)
> > > '067100XXXX' ]
> > > [Nov 6 09:25:29] VERBOSE[27927] chan_dahdi.c: > [a1]
> > > [Nov 6 09:25:29] VERBOSE[27927] chan_dahdi.c: > Sending Complete
> > > (len=
> > > 1)
> > >
> > >
> > > Am I correctly interpreting when saying that in the successful call,
> > > Asterisk is sending a [74 0e 21 01 8f 33 33 33 34 34 XX XX XX XX XX
> > > XX] message which is not otherwise sent ?
> > > What can explains this difference ?
> > > Is this something I can (should) control ?
> > >
> > > For reference:
> > > dahdi show version
> > > DAHDI Version: SVN-trunk-r8853M Echo Canceller: OSLEC
> > > pri show version
> > > libpri version: 1.4.10.2
> >
> > Improved support for manipulation of redirecting number is available
> > with the REDIRECTING dialplan function in Asterisk v1.8.x and
> > libpri v1.4.12. Prior to Asterisk v1.8.x you only have
> > CALLERID(RDNIS).
> >
> >
> https://wiki.asterisk.org/wiki/display/AST/Manipulating+Party+ID+Information
> >
> >
> > Richard
> >
> >
> > Hi Richard,
> >
> > 1. Could you elaborate a bit ?
> > Do you imply that the lines bellow were present (or missing) because I
> > did somewhere set CALLERID(RDNIS) and that I should use them ?
> >
> > > [Nov 6 09:32:07] VERBOSE[27954] chan_dahdi.c: > Redirecting Number
> > > (len=16) [ Ext: 0 TON: National Number (2) NPI: ISDN/Telephony
> > > Numbering Plan (E.164/E.163) (1)
> > > [Nov 6 09:32:07] VERBOSE[27954] chan_dahdi.c: > Ext: 0 Presentation:
> > > Presentation permitted, user number passed network screening (1)
> > > [Nov 6 09:32:07] VERBOSE[27954] chan_dahdi.c: > Ext: 1 Reason:
> > > Forwarded unconditionally (15)
> > > [Nov 6 09:32:07] VERBOSE[27954] chan_dahdi.c: '3334436XXXX' ]
>
> No.  I was trying to say that the value in the redirecting ie is
> controllable by setting/clearing the CALLERID(RDNIS) value.
>
> > 2. More generally, if I may ask, how do you understand both outputs
> > (from my previous post) ?
>
> Since you are not changing the value of RDNIS, then the RDNIS value
> came in from the telco.  The presence of the RDNIS value on the incoming
> call implies that the call has already been redirected at least once.
>
> The first example (working):
> I am interpreting the numbers as belonging to:
> Party A is the calling number
> Unknown party or Party B is the redirecting number
> Party C is the called number
>
> The second example (not working):
> I am interpreting the numbers as belonging to:
> Party A?? is the calling number
>     (guessing here.  It is either the calling number of the incoming
>      call or your dialplan has set it with CALLERID(num).)
> Party C is the called number
>
> The information here suggests that you should try setting CALLERID(RDNIS)
> to
> party B and dialing.  This would make the not working call look like the
> working call for your call forwarding case.
>
> Richard
>
>
Thanks for this enlightment.

I can confirm CALLERID(RDNIS) is not explicitely changed within the
Asterisk server.
The choosen format like 3334436XXXX is noticeable (the system is installed
in France where numbers are in this +33(0)123456789 shape).

It seems that sometimes, calls come in with this CALLERID(RDNIS) value set
and sometimes not, though all of them where direct.

I agree that setting CALLERID(RDNIS) myself is definitively worth trying.

1. Would you expect CALLERID(RDNIS) to be implicitely changed within the
Asterisk server ?
This page (http://www.voip-info.org/wiki/view/RDNIS) suggest this to be
true ("The Dial application also sets the RGN to the current extension")
and suggest CALLERID(RDNIS) to be overwritten by Dial.

2. As I feel specically new to this RDNIS concept, how should I set
CALLERID(RDNIS), before or after Answer() statement ?

Cheers
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.digium.com/pipermail/asterisk-users/attachments/20111109/9e336800/attachment.htm>