>> Sure... So, this issue is "sort of a bug" and it really needs to be >> implemented then! > > I'm afraid its not that simple. Unless I'm misunderstanding the > concepts of > IAX(2) design, it does not support such behaviour _by design_. Who > knows what would break if someone hacked our desires in there. A > solution then would be: choose another protocol. Technically you > could spin off an IAX2-cdr channel that supports it, but that would > require duplicate efforts to maintain both channels. My current > position is 'deal with it' and accept the extra traffic. If someone > with more knowledge about IAX(2) can comment on the feasability of > this behaviour we may proceed in that direction, otherwise we're just > stuck.
In that case, I suppose we have to put up with it untill it gets to be a real pain in the neck :) _______________________________________________ Asterisk-Users mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
