Date: Thu, 15 Jun 2000 21:40:25 +0200 (CEST) From: Bart van Leeuwen <bart@ixori.demon.nl> To: Gerhard Sittig <Gerhard.Sittig@gmx.net> Cc: freebsd-isdn@freebsd.org Subject: Re: reject Message-ID: <Pine.BSF.4.21.0006152132380.27335-100000@isengard.ixori.demon.nl> In-Reply-To: <20000615180028.M9883@speedy.gsinet>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Thu, 15 Jun 2000, Gerhard Sittig wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 14, 2000 at 23:05 +0200, Gary Jennejohn wrote:
> Accepting the call with an AM and immediately hanging up is one
> solution. But regarding immediate _rejection_ this *is* possible
> (and we've been through that a few years ago in another project).
>
> AFAICT (I'm not an communications expert and might use the wrong
> terms, but you surely get the idea) an incoming call is just
> signalled to the internal bus(ses). *Every* device has the
> opportunity to
> - ignore the call ("not mine, I don't care")
> - accept the call ("I _could_ handle this" in the meaning of "I
> apply for getting this job"!)
> - reject the call ("not for me _and_for_nobody_else_ I can think
> of")
Hmm. with some experimentation I see the following:
As long as any device says it cn handle the call (regardless of if it is
actually going to handle it) then the pbx here will keep signalling the
incomming call, even when another device rejects it.
As long as noone ever responds to it, the pbx will signal the other side
that the number does not exist (!!)
This might be the particular, and as the past learned, often slightly non
standard isdn environment used in the part of the Netherlands where I
live... ;-)
>
> There's a chance for multiple devices to accept the signalled
> call (not to get them, that's something the PBX will handle due
> to the packets' serialisation on the bus). And I consider this
> to be a feature. Think of signalling a voice call on many phones
> and have the user decide where to pick up the receiver. Or have
> a few remote control computers sit there and have them choose
> whether it's their working hour and whom they respond to. That's
> where they can share a MSN quite well.
>
> To summarize: There is a rejection message a device can emit
> speaking for *everyone* on the bus. It's just rarely used and
> might not be available at a userland command level. And it's
> very rare cases where this message is appropriate.
>
> > Oh, the _answering machine_ handles it. Now I understand. But I
> > had the impression from his mail that he wanted isdnd to reject
> > calls for other devices on the S0 bus, which can't work AFAICT.
>
> See above. We really suffered from this and it took quite some
> time to find out there's even such a feature and it's used in the
> software. Actually this tough rejection completely prevented the
> neighbour machines from getting any call (although they *saw*
> them). But this sounds like it absolutely is what's wanted here.
>
> (Mis)using the AM will accept the connection for a moment and
> lead to cost and a blocked B channel (i.e. data channel in
> contrast to the rejection completely handled in D channel
> messages). This should be considered -- unless one wants to
> "punish" the to be banned caller.
>
Hmm. I dono about how this works where you live, but the caller pays
regardless of this in my country. Ok, this may cause additional cost, but
that is maybe 10% above the cost already caused by simply pickng up a
phone and dialing the number.
(yes, the KPN is insane for charging for this, and something should be
done about it... but still, thats how it works right now here)
Bart.
To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-isdn" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.BSF.4.21.0006152132380.27335-100000>