asterisk users - Jun 2003 - Pattern matching: least-to-most specific PITA

My synapses are rather fried after a long few days of debugging other 
problems, so perhaps I'm being lazy in sending this to the general 
list, but I can't think straight about it.  Forgive me if there is an 
overly obvious solution to this.

I have a list of phone numbers that are SIP extensions.  I'd like to 
dial them via SIP if ${EXTEN} is equal to one of those numbers.  If 
${EXTEN} is not equal to one of those numbers, I'd like to send the 
call out to a PRI group, regardless of dialed sequence length or 
pattern.

It seems I cannot do this with *'s pattern matching, due to the order 
in which extensions are parsed, which seems to be least-specific to 
most-specific.  This causes all kinds of headaches when trying to use 
wildcards, since wildcards are super-least-specific.

My desire would be to have the more specific matches done first, so 
that if ${EXTEN} would be matched in an order that makes sense.  I 
understand why matching goes from least-to-most specific for analog 
equipment, but it makes certain tasks impossible from a dialplan 
point of view when I have the full number and I'm not waiting on a 
user to finish typing the digits.

If presented with 12123669751 I would expect the match to happen and 
the SIP extension to be dialed.  It doesn't.  It dials the Zap 
extension.

[foo]
;
exten => _1212366975X,1,Dial(SIP/${EXTEN})
exten => _181772721[8-9]X,1,Dial(SIP/${EXTEN})
exten => _191481287[4-7]X,1,Dial(SIP/${EXTEN})
exten => _141550926[0-2]X,1,Dial(SIP/${EXTEN})
;
exten => _.,1,Dial(Zap/g1/${EXTEN})
;


How do I invert this match examination to make it go most- to 
least-specific execution?

JT

I think that if you put

exten => _X.,1,DIal,Zap

it'll improve the matching dramatically

Martin

On Wed, 25 Jun 2003, John Todd wrote:
>
> My synapses are rather fried after a long few days of debugging other
> problems, so perhaps I'm being lazy in sending this to the general
> list, but I can't think straight about it.  Forgive me if there is an
> overly obvious solution to this.
>
> I have a list of phone numbers that are SIP extensions.  I'd like to
> dial them via SIP if ${EXTEN} is equal to one of those numbers.  If
> ${EXTEN} is not equal to one of those numbers, I'd like to send the
> call out to a PRI group, regardless of dialed sequence length or
> pattern.
>
> It seems I cannot do this with *'s pattern matching, due to the order
> in which extensions are parsed, which seems to be least-specific to
> most-specific.  This causes all kinds of headaches when trying to use
> wildcards, since wildcards are super-least-specific.
>
> My desire would be to have the more specific matches done first, so
> that if ${EXTEN} would be matched in an order that makes sense.  I
> understand why matching goes from least-to-most specific for analog
> equipment, but it makes certain tasks impossible from a dialplan
> point of view when I have the full number and I'm not waiting on a
> user to finish typing the digits.
>
> If presented with 12123669751 I would expect the match to happen and
> the SIP extension to be dialed.  It doesn't.  It dials the Zap
> extension.
>
> [foo]
> ;
> exten => _1212366975X,1,Dial(SIP/${EXTEN})
> exten => _181772721[8-9]X,1,Dial(SIP/${EXTEN})
> exten => _191481287[4-7]X,1,Dial(SIP/${EXTEN})
> exten => _141550926[0-2]X,1,Dial(SIP/${EXTEN})
> ;
> exten => _.,1,Dial(Zap/g1/${EXTEN})
> ;
>
>
> How do I invert this match examination to make it go most- to
> least-specific execution?
>
> JT
>
> _______________________________________________
> Asterisk-Users mailing list
> Asterisk-Users@lists.digium.com
> http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
>