Trunk groups?

[gbh2o]

I would like to see an easy way to specify 'groups' of trunks that may be used for a particular purpose. For example, DISA is best with trunks that permit setting/passing the inbound caller ID information... only certain providers allow that type of operation. Some groupings of trunks may have the best international rate structure, while others are better for domestic purposes.

I suppose that some form of tags/flags in a trunk database could also accomplish much the same function. A single outbound priority list just doesn't provide sufficient flexibility.

It would certainly be nice to be able to specify such things; in FreePBX for example ;-)

 

[james]

Freepbx allows all of what you have mentioned already.

 

[gbh2o]

Freepbx allows all of what you have mentioned already.

Allows or enables? I must be missing something then. For example, in FreePBX, how would I set DISA to use only those trunks that permit setting/passing through of the originating caller ID? Something that's transparent to, and requires no action by, the user.

 

[james]

there are 2 parts. trunks where you can orginize the channels as individuals or sets. and inbound/outbound routes where you control what trunk does what when and why.

 

[jroper]

Dear GBH20

When you discover what FreePBX/Asterisk can do, you're going to reckon it's better than beer!

You can decide what calls go out via which trunks based on outbound routes, and the number dialled.

Set the pattern of numbers to select the desired trunk or trunks, manipulate the numbers in the trunk so that they arrive at the telecom provider in the right format.

You route calls inbound, either on DID, CID or ZAP channel.

With routing on the basis of callerID, you can even pattern match, e.g. calls from 0049 go to German speakers and 0034 go to Spanish speakers.

Prepare to be amazed.

Joe

 

[gbh2o]

I must be overlooking the obvious somewhere.

Think I'll just stick to manually altering the .conf files to force things to work the way I want. I've always been able to pattern match, manipulate, select and route there.

And, I always did prefer assembly language [simple and direct with a bit of thought and effort] to the 'higher' level programming languages.