ists.digium.com
[mailto:asterisk-users-boun...@lists.digium.com] On Behalf Of Henry Dogger
Sent: Monday, November 07, 2011 11:33 AM
To: Asterisk Users Mailing List - Non-Commercial Discussion
Subject: Re: [asterisk-users] bug in queuemanager?
Hm, I see what you mean.
What I must add, the phones are
2011 17:37
To: 'Asterisk Users Mailing List - Non-Commercial Discussion'
Subject: Re: [asterisk-users] bug in queuemanager?
Call 1 was from 346 to 900. The log in the link provided shows it
correctly being in local/901 (line 8) from the queue and redialed (line
9). Line 12 seems to
: [asterisk-users] bug in queuemanager?
Yes I do J here is the output http://pastebin.com/qpWqdA50
I don't put the cdr's in csv but in database, so not sure what you want from
the db J
From: asterisk-users-boun...@lists.digium.com
[mailto:asterisk-users-boun...@lists.digium.com] On
7 november 2011 16:46
To: 'Asterisk Users Mailing List - Non-Commercial Discussion'
Subject: Re: [asterisk-users] bug in queuemanager?
Do you have an isolated environment where you can do a "core show
channels verbose" after the transfer, but before the end of the call
users-boun...@lists.digium.com
[mailto:asterisk-users-boun...@lists.digium.com] On Behalf Of Henry Dogger
Sent: Monday, November 07, 2011 9:39 AM
To: Asterisk Users Mailing List - Non-Commercial Discussion
Subject: Re: [asterisk-users] bug in queuemanager?
Nope, I encounter this with blind transfer as well a
rcial Discussion'
Subject: Re: [asterisk-users] bug in queuemanager?
Have you posted this to the forum "Asterisk Support" on asterisk.org?
One thing I see is that you are doing an attended transfer (*2) vs a
blind transfer (#1); that could be causing some sort of problem.
From:
users-boun...@lists.digium.com] On Behalf Of Henry Dogger
Sent: Monday, November 07, 2011 8:44 AM
To: Asterisk Users Mailing List - Non-Commercial Discussion
Subject: Re: [asterisk-users] bug in queuemanager?
Perhaps some help on where to look myself?
From: asterisk-users-boun...@lists.digium.com
[mailt
] bug in queuemanager?
Anyone?
From: asterisk-users-boun...@lists.digium.com
[mailto:asterisk-users-boun...@lists.digium.com] On Behalf Of Henry
Dogger
Sent: dinsdag 1 november 2011 13:00
To: Asterisk Users Mailing List - Non-Commercial Discussion
Subject: Re: [asterisk-users] bug in
Anyone?
From: asterisk-users-boun...@lists.digium.com
[mailto:asterisk-users-boun...@lists.digium.com] On Behalf Of Henry
Dogger
Sent: dinsdag 1 november 2011 13:00
To: Asterisk Users Mailing List - Non-Commercial Discussion
Subject: Re: [asterisk-users] bug in queuemanager?
Sorry it took
Discussion
Subject: Re: [asterisk-users] bug in queuemanager?
On Tue, Oct 25, 2011 at 7:25 AM, Henry Dogger
wrote:
Customer 200 calls to queue 900, Agent 300 answers but tells Customer
200 that he should be at Queue 901 and transfers Customer 200 (using *2)
to Queue 901. Agent 301 now gets the
On Tue, Oct 25, 2011 at 7:25 AM, Henry Dogger wrote:
> Customer 200 calls to queue 900, Agent 300 answers but tells Customer 200
> that he should be at Queue 901 and transfers Customer 200 (using *2) to
> Queue 901. Agent 301 now gets the call from Queue 901 with Customer 200,
> answers the calls
Hi all,
We are encountering some problems with the queuemanager in some specific
cases.
When an agent gets a call from a queue the agent gets a wrap-up time
after the call is finished, so far so good.
When the call enters the queue while being transferred from an agent
from another queue ther
12 matches
Mail list logo
