Hey all, Just a quick update - this functionality is now up for review on Gerrit, and can be found here <https://gerrit.asterisk.org/#/c/asterisk/+/10882/>.
More eyes on it would be helpful! On Thu, Dec 20, 2018 at 1:40 PM Seán C. McCord <ule...@gmail.com> wrote: > As Josh says, all calls would go to the app; the (completely > non-user-facing and non-user-editable) context would be roughly > equivalent to having fallthrough enabled and extension 's' going to > the Stasis App. You should not be able to assign an existing real > context to an ARI app. That would lead to confusion, which is one of > the reasons why I like the idea of having deterministic context names. > > As to the channel-in-bridge on ARI app transfer, I would fully expect > that channel to stay in whatever bridge it may be. Bridges are > logical link points between ARI apps anyway, and they can be > manipulated by multiple ARI apps at any given time anyway (this > assertion is from memory... it is possible I am mistaken here). Now, > as to whether the ARI app should automatically gain a subscription to > member bridges, that's a good question. I would lean toward not doing > so, but I do not have a strong argument beyond simplicity. > > > On Thu, Dec 20, 2018 at 1:25 PM Joshua C. Colp <jc...@digium.com> wrote: > > > > On Thu, Dec 20, 2018, at 2:14 PM, Corey Farrell wrote: > > > How will the ARI/dialplan integration handle specific extensions? For > > > example if I have a stasis app which registers itself to dialplan as > > > 'somecontext', how does this integration decide which extensions are > > > handled by the app? Does that app get calls for all extensions or only > > > specific extensions? Do we create a new type of ARI app which would > > > respond to PBX switch callbacks where all calls go to the stasis router > > > app which then accepts or rejects calls based on the ARI apps own > > > extension list? For example if we have a context: > > > > > > [from-outside] > > > exten => 7002052000,1,Stasis(myapp) > > > exten => 7002052001,1,Stasis(myapp) > > > How do you envision replicating having these two extensions handled but > > > all other extensions being invalid? > > > > The context would send all calls to that application (except for the h > extension). That application would then be able to move that channel to > another application according to its own routing logic if it wanted. > > > > -- > > Joshua C. Colp > > Digium - A Sangoma Company | Senior Software Developer > > 445 Jan Davis Drive NW - Huntsville, AL 35806 - US > > Check us out at: www.digium.com & www.asterisk.org > > > > -- > > _____________________________________________________________________ > > -- Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com -- > > > > asterisk-dev mailing list > > To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: > > http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-dev > > > > -- > Seán C. McCord > ule...@gmail.com > CyCore Systems > > -- > _____________________________________________________________________ > -- Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com -- > > asterisk-dev mailing list > To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: > http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-dev -- *Benjamin Ford* Digium - A Sangoma Company | Software Engineer 445 Jan Davis Drive NW - Huntsville, AL 35806 - US <https://maps.google.com/?q=445+Jan+Davis+Drive+NW+-+Huntsville,+AL+35806+-+US&entry=gmail&source=g> Check us out at: https://digium.com · https://sangoma.com
-- _____________________________________________________________________ -- Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com -- asterisk-dev mailing list To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-dev