Matthew Jordan wrote: <snip>
I think that's a better approach as well. Right now, however, I can only think of two requirements: * I want audio to pass through the core, as opposed to directly between the participants * I want DTMF Everything else is handled transparently by the bridging core. As another thought - this actually feels a lot like the mixing types - at least from the perspective of the end user. Wanting a bridge that does a holding mix as opposed to a two-party mix is, loosely speaking, a 'requirement' of the bridge. Maybe the DTMF requirement should just be in that same field, and we figure out which is which internally when parsing it?
Not a bad idea! "mixing,dtmf" - Please give me a mixing bridge with DTMF events. "mixing,proxy" - Please give me a mixing bridge and always proxy media.
-- Joshua Colp Digium, Inc. | Senior Software Developer 445 Jan Davis Drive NW - Huntsville, AL 35806 - US Check us out at: www.digium.com & www.asterisk.org _______________________________________________ asterisk-app-dev mailing list asterisk-app-dev@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.digium.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-app-dev
