[Serusers] Billing and Blind call transfer

[Schweizer Laurent]

Here, I would suggest
Referred-By: c at toto.com <mailto:b at toto.com>

btw: why is there no SIP URI, but a mailto URI?

The <mailto:.....> was not in the original message (I think that he was
added by the email client)

I also think that  
Referred-By: c at toto.com  is better that Referred-By: b at toto.com  but this is
done by the cisco ip Phone.

Is that correct or not ?

Laurent



-----Original Message-----
From: Klaus Darilion [mailto:klaus.mailinglists at pernau.at] 
Sent: mercredi, 11. mai 2005 14:10
To: Schweizer Laurent
Cc: serusers at lists.iptel.org
Subject: Re: [Serusers] Billing and Blind call transfer

Schweizer Laurent wrote:
...
> When C sends the REFER request to A we have something like this:
> 
>  
> 
> REFER.
> 
> From: b at toto.com <mailto:b at toto.com>
> 
> To: a at toto.com <mailto:a at toto.com>
> 
> Refer-To: mobile at toto.com
> 
> Referred-By: b at toto.com <mailto:b at toto.com>
> 
Here, I would suggest
Referred-By: c at toto.com <mailto:b at toto.com>

btw: why is there no SIP URI, but a mailto URI?

regards,
klaus

>  
> 
> And then when A sends the Invite to the gateways:
> 
>  
> 
> INVITE.
> 
> From: a at toto.com <mailto:a at toto.com>
> 
> To: mobile at toto.com <mailto:mobile at toto.com>
> 
> Referred-By: b at toto.com <mailto:b at toto.com>
> 
>  
> 
> But the call is transferred by C and not by B so the Referred-By: is not 
> correct. Is that an error from the cisco ip phone (I think not) and how 
> can I bill this call (I do the billing on the gateways).
> 
>  
> 
> Thanks.
> 
> Laurent
> 
>  
> 
> 
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Serusers mailing list
> serusers at lists.iptel.org
> http://lists.iptel.org/mailman/listinfo/serusers