CallerID Support for *

Are you saying you want to start sending out a CID of 1234*1061 (in your example) when calling out to the PSTN. And then what happens at the far end, if the carrier allows this to be transmitted and doesn't reject the call, when someone in the outside world tries to call you back?

As a general trend, we are looking at removing the ability to even send out CID as the technically correct standard of "Name" <num> because of the number of carriers who reject the "Name" part even though it is correct. (And nothing much is lost since roughly 100% of carriers don't do anything with your CNAM as CNAM is obtained at the far end when receiving calls).

Am I not understanding the request or otherwise missing something? Please clarify.

I think what you may be missing is that not all outgoing calls wind up on the PSTN, and certain specialized services may have their own requirements. But anyway, I just wanted to say please DON'T remove any existing functionality when it comes to Caller ID, again because you don't know whether a call that hits any outgoing trunk will ever actually be sent via the PSTN. The trunk may be to another SIP or IAX-based service that actually makes use of the name and number sent, even if only on calls gto their own customers that never see the PSTN. For example, if someone had a VoicePulse? account (just to pull one out of thin air) and sent caller ID name and number, the name data might get dumped if the call actually goes to the PSTN, but would almost certainly be preserved and used if the call was to another VoicePulse? customer. Please remember that users quite often use FreePBX in ways you don't anticipate, and if you start pulling out existent functionality, people will become very reluctant to upgrade (and/or you invite "forks").

wiseoldown,

yes you are right there are some 'in network' scenarios that preserve the CNAM which is about the only reason that we haven't made the change yet. As far as clarification from the original request though, I still don't see one.

Keep in mind decisions about functionality and validation are taken within the context of the larger population of users. I can tell you with certainty that MANY MANY users have gone through LOTS of pain and EXPENSE because of carriers who react badly to properly formatted but otherwise useless CNAM. That may likely outweigh the much more infrequent cases but in any event, please carry this discussion elsewhere as I'd like to keep the feedback focused on the bug.