I have an ITSP we are trying to work with that has an "Unusual" way of working, but that said my understanding of their behaviour is that it is fully RFC compliant. Can someone suggest how I might be able to interoperate under these circumstances:
We register fine with them, and send the default asterisk Contact: header of: Contact: <sip:s...@x.x.x.x> This then causes ALL calls from the ITSP inbound to us to be addressed: INVITE sip:s...@x.x.x.x:5060;transport=udp SIP/2.0 To: <sip:44123456...@x.x.x.x:5060;transport=udp> [other headers omitted] In fact, whatever we send in the Contact: header is reflected in the INVITE for inbound calls, and the actual number dialled is always placed in the To: header. What 99.9% of our ITSPs would send is: INVITE sip:44123456...@x.x.x.x:5060;transport=udp SIP/2.0 To: <sip:44123456...@x.x.x.x:5060;transport=udp> [other headers omitted] As you can see, the correct destination number is placed into the INVITE header AND the To: header, and Asterisk routes it correctly based on the INVITE. My questions: - Is there a way of telling chan_sip to register with multiple Contact: headers in the registration request, so that all of the acceptable DDI numbers can be presented to the ITSP (This is what the RFC seems to suggest is the "correct" way to operate.) - Alternatively, has anyone encountered this previously, and perhaps created an "s" extension that then digs into the To: header, and routes according to that? Examples, workarounds and solutions are all welcome! Help? Thanks, Steve _______________________________________________ -- Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com -- asterisk-users mailing list To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users