| 03:26.45 | *** join/#asterisk-dev michael-i (~anonymous@61-220-35-170.HINET-IP.hinet.net) |
| 05:39.40 | *** join/#asterisk-dev zh-home (~zerohalo@74.61.200.139) |
| 05:56.27 | *** join/#asterisk-dev irroot (~gregory@197.105.75.102) |
| 05:56.50 | *** part/#asterisk-dev irroot (~gregory@197.105.75.102) |
| 06:37.45 | *** join/#asterisk-dev irroot (~gregory@197.169.163.130) |
| 06:38.12 | *** part/#asterisk-dev irroot (~gregory@197.169.163.130) |
| 07:03.22 | *** join/#asterisk-dev pnlarsson (~niklas@fw1.gml.g.icnet.infracom.se) |
| 07:10.34 | *** join/#asterisk-dev hehol (~Adium@2a01:198:71d:0:21f:d0ff:fea1:568e) |
| 07:44.05 | *** join/#asterisk-dev irroot (~gregory@197.109.191.198) |
| 07:44.36 | *** part/#asterisk-dev irroot (~gregory@197.109.191.198) |
| 07:47.09 | *** join/#asterisk-dev sgimeno (~sgimeno@163.117.206.10) |
| 07:56.03 | *** join/#asterisk-dev lftsy (~lftsy@194.38.160.113) |
| 07:57.06 | *** join/#asterisk-dev irroot (~gregory@197.109.1.38) |
| 07:58.12 | *** part/#asterisk-dev irroot (~gregory@197.109.1.38) |
| 08:07.44 | *** join/#asterisk-dev schmidts (~schmidts@Lo20-rt01.lm33.sil.at) |
| 08:07.47 | schmidts | good morning |
| 08:15.15 | schmidts | after i reread rfc3261 i had an idea about sip dialog identification, maybe its just stupid but it could increase the search for an allready existing dialog a lot |
| 08:16.26 | schmidts | if we would set the TO-Tag of a response to the pointer address of this pvt, imho we could directly use this pointer when a response or request is sent from the uac, and even if asterisk is the uac we could use the same in the from tag. |
| 08:39.22 | *** join/#asterisk-dev michael-i (~anonymous@61-220-35-170.HINET-IP.hinet.net) |
| 09:33.29 | *** join/#asterisk-dev tzafrir_laptop (~tzafrir@local.xorcom.com) |
| 09:33.29 | *** mode/#asterisk-dev [+o tzafrir_laptop] by ChanServ |
| 09:48.43 | schmidts | can someone tell me why asterisk supports the privacy header only for remote-party-id headers but not for the p-asserted-identity header? |
| 09:51.27 | schmidts | ok i meant the privacy options for the PAI header not the privacy header itself |
| 09:52.52 | schmidts | sorry i was completly wrong about this, this privacy options are only valid on remote-party-id headers :( |
| 09:56.39 | wdoekes2 | schmidts: there's a separate Privacy header, iirc |
| 09:56.54 | *** join/#asterisk-dev irroot (~gregory@197.170.205.134) |
| 09:57.00 | wdoekes2 | morning irroot |
| 09:57.19 | irroot | yo yo hi there |
| 09:57.23 | schmidts | morning iirrot |
| 09:57.35 | irroot | morning folks |
| 09:58.08 | schmidts | wdoekes2 there is both, a separate privacy header which imho should be used with PAI together or also without, and the privacy "option" like =privacy=full which can be used for a remote-party-id header |
| 09:58.10 | irroot | bandwidth has been a mess of late so bouncing like a rabit |
| 09:59.50 | wdoekes2 | yes.. Privacy(+PAI) or RPID |
| 10:04.20 | schmidts | ok but it looks like asterisk doesnt support the normal privacy header :( |
| 10:04.37 | schmidts | grep "add_header" -riI channels/chan_sip.c | grep -i privacy even on trunk doesnt give me any result |
| 10:05.28 | wdoekes2 | get_pai does get it |
| 10:05.49 | wdoekes2 | but that's the only occurrence in 1.8 |
| 10:06.36 | wdoekes2 | however: if ((lid_pres & AST_PRES_RESTRICTION) != AST_PRES_ALLOWED) { ast_str_set(&tmp, -1, "%s", anonymous_string); |
| 10:06.43 | wdoekes2 | it simply sets the PAI to anonymous |
| 10:07.36 | *** join/#asterisk-dev Netgeeks-laptop (~chris@173.11.68.156) |
| 10:07.50 | wdoekes2 | the problem is that it's undefined whether you trust your clients |
| 10:07.59 | *** join/#asterisk-dev Kobaz (~kobaz@its.kobaz.net) |
| 10:08.05 | wdoekes2 | I send RPID by hand, because I cannot have upstream private cli's leaked |
| 10:08.57 | *** join/#asterisk-dev Qwell (~north@northantara-2-pt.tunnel.tserv3.fmt2.ipv6.he.net) |
| 10:09.21 | schmidts | wdoekes2 yes i know but thats not what i want, i am trying to connect my services to a CISCO 2900 softswitch and they are using the PAI field for the network provided number and the from header for the user provided (not screened) number and in austria you also have to send the network provided number even if its hidden |
| 10:09.51 | *** join/#asterisk-dev kenhunt (~kenhunt@nat/digium/x-nxffeiguepswvnnb) |
| 10:09.53 | wdoekes2 | in your case you'd have to do the inverse of what I do |
| 10:09.58 | wdoekes2 | send RPID and Privacy by hand |
| 10:10.02 | wdoekes2 | s/RPID/PAI |
| 10:10.28 | schmidts | i will check the rfc for the privacy header, shouldnt be too hard to get this working ;) |
| 10:10.41 | wdoekes2 | I've only ever used/seen 'full' and 'none' |
| 10:10.57 | schmidts | imho there isnt much more about it |
| 10:10.59 | schmidts | and id |
| 10:17.19 | irroot | had good laugh yesterday company here tried to get "asteerisk" working has been for 3 weeks problem is trixbox is not asterisk ... flashed there box and was up in 30min |
| 10:38.17 | *** join/#asterisk-dev irroot (~gregory@197.175.178.65) |
| 10:39.49 | *** join/#asterisk-dev merbanan (~benjamin@c-94-255-221-5.cust.bredband2.com) |
| 10:56.55 | schmidts | btw what do you think about adding a feature to receivefax to act like voicemail? so you can provide an user object to it, with an email adress and the received fax will be sent to this email adress? |
| 11:01.34 | *** join/#asterisk-dev tzafrir_laptop (~tzafrir@local.xorcom.com) |
| 11:01.34 | *** mode/#asterisk-dev [+o tzafrir_laptop] by ChanServ |
| 11:02.40 | *** join/#asterisk-dev irroot (~gregory@197.108.149.170) |
| 11:11.48 | *** join/#asterisk-dev hehol (~hehol@2001:1438:1009:200:45fd:89d:7577:690) |
| 12:26.28 | WIMPy | schmidts: The two callerID scenario you described is the same with Huawei. |
| 12:28.56 | schmidts | WIMPy imho asterisk doesnt know anything about "two" callerids ;) |
| 12:29.20 | schmidts | only for inbound like we allready talked about for the ss7 stuff like CID <-> ANI |
| 12:29.31 | WIMPy | CALLERID(num) and CALLERID(ani)? Didn't we discuss that when you started with ss7? |
| 12:30.07 | schmidts | yes and i wrote a patch for ss7 which worked really well so far, but my company was bought last year and now i have to migrate to their services and this is a cisco softswitch ;) |
| 12:30.14 | WIMPy | Maybe chan_sip doesn't. But in neither direction, as far as I can see. |
| 12:30.59 | schmidts | no it works for inbound calls coming from dahdi or atleast zaptel as i can say. on my asterisk 1.2 gateway i can see different values for the CiD and the ANI value when set on the pstn side |
| 12:31.47 | WIMPy | Yes, that should work. Not sure if I tried sending with dahdi. |
| 12:31.59 | schmidts | the problem is i dont know if it would be the common setup to send the "user provided not screened" number in the from header and the network provided in the PAI header, if yes then its worth writing a patch for it |
| 12:32.52 | WIMPy | That's the way I receive them from United Internet, who use Huawei stuff. |
| 12:33.22 | schmidts | maybe thats something for the dev list ;) |
| 12:39.35 | *** join/#asterisk-dev kpfleming (~kpfleming@asterisk/digium-director-of-software-tech/kpfleming) |
| 12:39.35 | *** mode/#asterisk-dev [+o kpfleming] by ChanServ |
| 12:43.30 | schmidts | good morning kpfleming |
| 12:44.05 | *** join/#asterisk-dev leifmadsen (~Leif@asterisk/documenteur-extraordinaire/blitzrage) |
| 12:44.05 | *** mode/#asterisk-dev [+o leifmadsen] by ChanServ |
| 12:44.45 | kpfleming | schmidts: yes, morning indeed. |
| 12:50.47 | schmidts | WIMPy btw i have just checked what happens to the callerid information and it looks like asterisk handles an incoming PAI or RPID header just like the from header and store it in the callerid num+ name values, as you said sip doesnt take care about two different callerids |
| 12:55.50 | schmidts | WIMPY ok i was wrong, it overwrites the values in the cid_num field but first copies the values into the ani field but then this would be different than dahdi will do it. |
| 12:57.28 | WIMPy | Maybe I should try again. But last time I didn't find the network provided number anywhere. |
| 12:58.19 | schmidts | WIMPy with my carrier, normal euroisdn PRI connections and zaptel on an asterisk 1.2 i get the network provided in the ANI field |
| 12:58.43 | WIMPy | No. The other way. I only get the network number. |
| 12:59.04 | WIMPy | I thought we were at the SIP side. |
| 12:59.15 | schmidts | ah ok ;) |
| 12:59.21 | mvanbaak | =/17 |
| 12:59.58 | *** join/#asterisk-dev tzafrir_laptop (~tzafrir@local.xorcom.com) |
| 12:59.58 | *** mode/#asterisk-dev [+o tzafrir_laptop] by ChanServ |
| 13:00.29 | schmidts | on the sip side it depends which callerid is sent in which header. if the network provided is in the PAI header you will get it in the callerid number value, and the user provided (from the from header) will be in the ani value |
| 13:01.05 | WIMPy | I just got the network number both in (num) and (ani). |
| 13:01.33 | WIMPy | Will switch on sip debug to verify they're still sending both the way I found out last time. |
| 13:01.46 | schmidts | ok ;) |
| 13:05.14 | WIMPy | Nope. As I said. |
| 13:06.09 | WIMPy | http://wimpy.yeti.dk/pastebin |
| 13:20.21 | *** join/#asterisk-dev tzafrir_laptop (~tzafrir@local.xorcom.com) |
| 13:20.21 | *** mode/#asterisk-dev [+o tzafrir_laptop] by ChanServ |
| 13:55.54 | *** join/#asterisk-dev mjordan (~mjordan@nat/digium/x-gpttjmdzrlbsuoqt) |
| 13:55.54 | *** mode/#asterisk-dev [+o mjordan] by ChanServ |
| 14:05.13 | *** join/#asterisk-dev serafie (~erin@nat/digium/x-dftjkgkcswotghhu) |
| 14:21.22 | seanbright | so since the astdb conversion to sqlite, the results of 'database show' are not sorted... any reason not to add that back in? |
| 14:51.04 | *** join/#asterisk-dev putnopvut (~putnopvut@asterisk/master-of-queues/mmichelson) |
| 14:51.04 | *** mode/#asterisk-dev [+o putnopvut] by ChanServ |
| 15:10.53 | pabelanger | seanbright: though that was fixed |
| 15:11.03 | pabelanger | I do know there is a JIRA issue for it |
| 15:11.29 | seanbright | i did a search and didn't see it |
| 15:11.36 | WIMPy | In current 10 it's not sorted. |
| 15:11.43 | seanbright | just committed the change to 10 and trunk |
| 15:11.51 | seanbright | if it's ill informed i will revert |
| 15:18.45 | WIMPy | Yes, that's sorted now. |
| 15:20.46 | leifmadsen | seanbright: thanks! |
| 15:20.49 | leifmadsen | WIMPy: thanks for testing |
| 15:28.41 | pabelanger | Man, the search functions in JIRA suck |
| 15:28.54 | pabelanger | I need to build SQL queries :( |
| 15:28.59 | leifmadsen | JQL? |
| 15:29.02 | leifmadsen | they are awesome |
| 15:29.31 | pabelanger | yes, they are powerful, but a pain in the ass to build them out each time you want to search for something |
| 15:29.42 | pabelanger | likes mantis advance search better |
| 15:31.31 | pabelanger | FWIW: here was the email about 'database show' not being sorted. http://lists.digium.com/pipermail/asterisk-users/2011-October/267049.html |
| 15:41.14 | *** join/#asterisk-dev sruffell (~Adium@asterisk/the-kernel-guy/sruffell) |
| 15:41.14 | *** mode/#asterisk-dev [+o sruffell] by ChanServ |
| 16:01.38 | *** join/#asterisk-dev kpfleming (~kpfleming@asterisk/digium-director-of-software-tech/kpfleming) |
| 16:01.38 | *** mode/#asterisk-dev [+o kpfleming] by ChanServ |
| 16:19.57 | *** join/#asterisk-dev malcolmd (~malcolmd@pdpc/sponsor/digium/malcolmd) |
| 16:19.57 | *** mode/#asterisk-dev [+o malcolmd] by ChanServ |
| 16:20.23 | *** join/#asterisk-dev Qwell (~north@pdpc/sponsor/digium/Qwell) |
| 16:20.23 | *** mode/#asterisk-dev [+o Qwell] by ChanServ |
| 16:26.12 | WIMPy | Can someone give me a hint if there's anything I could use in an #if to check if we're pre or post r350223? |
| 16:27.02 | file | I don't think so... |
| 16:28.01 | Qwell | You could check if the new functions exist, but that's super hacky. If you've got code against trunk, just update it.. |
| 16:28.11 | Qwell | There's no valid reason to support old code. |
| 16:28.26 | WIMPy | Yes, it works, but I want it to still work with older versions. |
| 16:28.45 | WIMPy | Not everyone likes the latest version. |
| 16:28.52 | Qwell | It's trunk. |
| 16:29.03 | Qwell | If they don't "like the latest revision", they shouldn't be using it. |
| 16:29.41 | WIMPy | Yes, but I'd like to support both the current version as well as official Asterisk Versions. |
| 16:30.09 | Qwell | Why? Every revision control system has support for branching. Why not use it? |
| 16:30.11 | kpfleming | well, then you can use the 'asterisk version' macros that are defined |
| 16:30.24 | kpfleming | but really.. yeah. maintain separate patches, it will be much better. |
| 16:30.43 | file | you will keep your sanity |
| 16:30.45 | WIMPy | Users like tarballs or even packages. |
| 16:30.59 | Qwell | They can download the correct tarball for their version of Asterisk. |
| 16:31.24 | Qwell | Trying to make one set of code work for all branches of Asterisk makes it much more complex than it needs to be. |
| 16:31.55 | WIMPy | I know but that's what others wanted, so that's just the way it is. |
| 16:32.19 | WIMPy | I'd certainly remove pre-1.8 support, but that didn;t go down too well. |
| 16:32.38 | Qwell | The "others" are wrong. :) |
| 16:32.55 | WIMPy | Don't tell me. |
| 16:33.01 | *** join/#asterisk-dev irroot (~gregory@197.174.224.66) |
| 16:33.14 | WIMPy | However Support for the last few version seems desirable to me as well. |
| 16:33.46 | Qwell | Lots of things that are wrong are desirable. :) |
| 16:35.24 | WIMPy | Having to get the exact right combination of various parts to get them to work together can be quite a PITA. |
| 16:35.44 | Qwell | so why do it? |
| 16:36.26 | WIMPy | Do what? I'd like at least some margin for versions that work together. |
| 17:19.56 | *** join/#asterisk-dev jeffg (~jeffg@pdpc/supporter/professional/jeffg) |
| 17:22.51 | *** join/#asterisk-dev irroot (~gregory@197.174.4.13) |
| 17:33.27 | *** join/#asterisk-dev zh-home (~zerohalo@74.61.196.236) |
| 17:40.09 | *** join/#asterisk-dev sruffell (~Adium@asterisk/the-kernel-guy/sruffell) |
| 17:40.09 | *** mode/#asterisk-dev [+o sruffell] by ChanServ |
| 18:35.03 | *** join/#asterisk-dev anthm (~anthm@freeswitch/developer/anthm) |
| 19:01.55 | *** join/#asterisk-dev joshaidan (~brianj@S0106001c1023e838.tb.shawcable.net) |
| 19:22.21 | wdoekes2 | pabelanger: trunk? or lower? (re: make -j) |
| 19:23.54 | pabelanger | wdoekes2: I was thinking about that too, in the past making build changes in release branches have been a nightmare (EG: make sounds). My vote is trunk only |
| 19:26.13 | wdoekes2 | agreed. I'll just leave it a moment for someone else to chime in |
| 19:26.26 | pabelanger | nods |
| 19:26.46 | kpfleming | yes. build system changes that don't fix a problem that causes a failure to build should be trunk only. |
| 19:34.18 | file | I like it when stuff is already fixed but I don't like it when I think what fixed it didn't actually fix it |
| 19:38.29 | mjordan | which means you have something to fix |
| 19:39.24 | file | mjordan, not exactly |
| 19:40.10 | mjordan | but if the fixing didn't fix the thing that needed fixing, you potentially have two fixes to fix |
| 19:40.24 | file | I didn't fix anything |
| 19:40.41 | file | it was already fixed, I was just seeing if what I thought would have fixed it did |
| 19:41.00 | file | fixing the fix is not to be fixed! |
| 19:41.04 | file | fix. |
| 19:41.07 | file | okay, I'm done |
| 19:42.12 | pabelanger | fight, fight, fight |
| 19:42.23 | file | and stream it live for money? |
| 19:42.44 | pabelanger | I was thinking just having it locally at the bike racks |
| 19:54.50 | pabelanger | Corydon76-home: you're a kind person :) |
| 19:55.29 | Corydon76-home | It was a simple and easy change. |
| 19:57.14 | *** join/#asterisk-dev russellb (~russellb@redhat/russellb) |
| 19:57.14 | *** mode/#asterisk-dev [+o russellb] by ChanServ |
| 19:57.18 | *** join/#asterisk-dev mvanbaak (~michiel@asterisk/contributor-and-bug-marshal/mvanbaak) |
| 19:57.18 | *** mode/#asterisk-dev [+o mvanbaak] by ChanServ |
| 20:43.18 | *** join/#asterisk-dev file (~file@asterisk/developer-and-muffin-lover/file) |
| 20:43.18 | *** mode/#asterisk-dev [+o file] by ChanServ |
| 20:58.35 | putnopvut | I just ran the run-test script in the callparking test in the testsuite. How do I tell if the test passed or failed? The output doesn't say either way. |
| 20:59.17 | pabelanger | putnopvut: ./runtests.py -t tests/callparking |
| 21:00.01 | putnopvut | pabelanger: excellent. Thanks. |
| 21:00.32 | putnopvut | aw pants, I didn't realize you had to run it forma subdirectory of an Asterisk source tree. |
| 21:00.58 | kpfleming | putnopvut: FYI, there is a new board game called 'Pants'. |
| 21:01.14 | putnopvut | interesting |
| 21:01.45 | file | wonders what the goal of the board game is |
| 21:02.32 | putnopvut | To run the longest without panting? |
| 21:02.56 | mjordan | putnopvut: it assumes its there for version checking, build option checking, and some other shenanigans |
| 21:03.05 | pabelanger | putnopvut: yes, it's kinda fail ATM |
| 21:03.20 | pabelanger | we really should be using asterisk -V |
| 21:03.36 | mjordan | I'm not sure I'd classify it as "Fail". That may work for versioning, but somewhere you need the build options |
| 21:03.56 | mjordan | since we make decisions in the testsuite based on whether or not Asterisk was compiled with a number of different flags |
| 21:04.04 | putnopvut | Got this error: ImportError: No module named asterisk.version. Not sure what's needed to correct this error. |
| 21:04.23 | mjordan | hm. That would be the python library |
| 21:04.33 | mjordan | libraries in your testsuite |
| 21:04.38 | putnopvut | Right. Do I need to add something to my PYTHONPATH? |
| 21:05.33 | pabelanger | mjordan: *CLI> core show settings; Build Options: BETTER_BACKTRACES, TEST_FRAMEWORK, DONT_OPTIMIZE, DEBUG_THREADS, LOADABLE_MODULES |
| 21:05.44 | pabelanger | it would require some magic to get it working |
| 21:05.56 | pabelanger | putnopvut: no, it should just work |
| 21:06.03 | mjordan | but that means you'd have to have a running instance of Asterisk to determine that |
| 21:06.14 | mjordan | some of this we determine before we execute tests |
| 21:06.20 | putnopvut | pabelanger: is there an assumed location I'm supposed to run runtests.py from? |
| 21:07.07 | mjordan | requiring running instances of Asterisk to determine if we should execute a test is how we end up with a lot of files being created in the /tmp/ directory. Its a tradeoff, and there's pros and cons either way - but I don't necessarily think that it means our current implementation decision was bad. |
| 21:07.42 | mjordan | putnopvut: yes. The testsuite directory. |
| 21:08.08 | putnopvut | Ah, that would be problematic for me, since I didn't check out the testsuite within an Asterisk source checkout. I'll correct that. |
| 21:08.11 | mjordan | anywhere else is probably going to lead to pathing issues, as we make some assumptions about the current working and current executing directories |
| 21:09.43 | putnopvut | Okay, got it running now and it appears to be passing. Yay. |
| 21:09.51 | putnopvut | Thanks for the assistance. |
| 21:10.32 | mjordan | I know Leif wrote a really good article awhile back about setting up the testsuite - we should probably put that up on the public wiki |
| 21:10.58 | kpfleming | yes |
| 21:11.06 | leifmadsen | I wonder how out of date that is now :) |
| 21:11.14 | mjordan | and here it is from costa rica as well: http://www.asteriskcr.com/?p=237 |
| 21:11.22 | opticron | also be aware that running runtests.py is not necessarily the same as running it via the testsuite |
| 21:11.23 | mjordan | leifmadsen: not very, actually :-D |
| 21:11.34 | leifmadsen | heh, I wrote that when we had 10 tests :) |
| 21:11.35 | pabelanger | putnopvut: from your asterisk source directory, check out testsuite into it. Then from testsuite directory, run runtests.py |
| 21:12.02 | mjordan | http://blogs.asterisk.org/2010/04/29/installing-the-asterisk-test-suite/ |
| 21:12.05 | opticron | since the testsuite sets up some parts of the asterisk configuration |
| 21:12.40 | pabelanger | mjordan: only downside, running the testsuite requires source. Something that might not work if you want to run it on a production box. We can work around it by allowing people to pass flags to runtests.py |
| 21:12.45 | putnopvut | pabelanger: thanks, I got it now. I didn't realize that I *had* to run tests from the testsuite directory. |
| 21:12.47 | leifmadsen | heh, one of the responses is from polybeacon (Paul) saying he was going to try out the testsuite :) |
| 21:13.23 | mjordan | pabelanger: as a product that is meant to provide integration level tests, I don't currently see that as a major problem - but that's my opinion. |
| 22:02.16 | *** join/#asterisk-dev b3nt_pin (~b3ntpin@142.162.36.51) |
| 22:27.31 | *** part/#asterisk-dev mjordan (~mjordan@nat/digium/x-gpttjmdzrlbsuoqt) |
| 22:28.55 | *** join/#asterisk-dev mjordan (~mjordan@nat/digium/x-gpttjmdzrlbsuoqt) |
| 22:28.55 | *** mode/#asterisk-dev [+o mjordan] by ChanServ |
| 22:36.33 | *** part/#asterisk-dev joshaidan (~brianj@S0106001c1023e838.tb.shawcable.net) |
| 23:23.13 | *** join/#asterisk-dev p3nguin (~xwQ5kwYl6@cobalt.esxi.hosts.a2infotech.com) |