Skip to content
Snippets Groups Projects
Commit 5aa43c0a authored by Steve Murphy's avatar Steve Murphy
Browse files

Merged revisions 134883 via svnmerge from

https://origsvn.digium.com/svn/asterisk/branches/1.4

........
r134883 | murf | 2008-07-31 13:23:42 -0600 (Thu, 31 Jul 2008) | 51 lines

(closes issue #11849)
Reported by: greyvoip
Tested by: murf

OK, a few days of debugging, a bunch of instrumentation
in chan_sip, main/channel.c, main/pbx.c, etc. and 5 solid 
notebook pages of notes later, I  have made the small
tweek necc. to get the start time right on the second 
CDR when:

  A Calls B
  B answ.
  A hits Xfer button on sip phone,
  A dials C and hits the OK button,
  A hangs up
  C answers ringing phone
  B and C converse
  B and/or C hangs up

But does not harm the scenario where:

  A Calls B
  B answ.
  B hits xfer button on sip phone,
  B dials C and hits the OK button,
  B hangs up
  C answers ringing phone
  A and C converse
  A and/or C hangs up

The difference in start times on the second CDR is because
of a Masquerade on the B channel when the xfer number is 
sent. It ends up replacing the CDR on the B channel with
a duplicate, which ends up getting tossed out. We keep 
a pointer to the first CDR, and update *that* after the
bridge closes. But, only if the CDR has changed.

I hope this change is specific enough not to muck
up any current CDR-based apps. In my defence, I 
assert that the previous information was wrong,
and this change fixes it, and possibly other
similar scenarios.

I wonder if I should be doing the same thing
for the channel, as I did for the peer, but
I can't think of a scenario this might affect.
I leave it, then, as an exersize for the users,
to find the scenario where the chan's CDR 
changes and loses the proper start time.


........

and as to 1.4 to trunk; have I expressed my 
feelings about code shifting from one file
to another? Good.


git-svn-id: https://origsvn.digium.com/svn/asterisk/trunk@134922 65c4cc65-6c06-0410-ace0-fbb531ad65f3
parent c4131d97
Branches
Tags
No related merge requests found
Loading
0% Loading or .
You are about to add 0 people to the discussion. Proceed with caution.
Please register or to comment