Daniel-Constantin Mierla schrieb:
On 19.07.2009 17:42 Uhr, Juha Heinanen wrote:
Alex Balashov writes:
> The new inventions Daniel introduced in 1.5.x - especially
dlg_bridge() -
> have also served me incredibly well. It's allowed me to totally ditch
> Asterisk in a couple of outbound call broadcast scenarios. Great
stuff!
if you need to do that kind of bridging often, then sure dialog module
is a way to go.
daniel suggested that i could use dialog module dlg_bridge mi command to
implement click-to-dial calls.
if only a very small percentage of all calls would be click-to-dial
calls and thus use dialog module, would it introduce a performance
penalty for every bye (or even for every in-dialog) request, because
they need to be checked for did param in route header?
the initial dialog created by dlg_bridge (invite+refer+bye) is not
How are NOTIFYs sent by the transferee handled? Are they also
auomatically answered with 200?
regards
klaus
tracked by dialog module (nor stored in db). There is no penalty, the
call created by one side because of REFER comes to proxy as an usual
call and it is a matter of config to be tacked or not.
Bottom line, if you load dialog module just for dlg_bridge (don't set
the dlg flag nor use dlg_manage() in config), there is no effect for any
of the calls.
Daniel
_______________________________________________
sr-dev mailing list
sr-dev@lists.sip-router.org
http://lists.sip-router.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sr-dev
