Hello, when I set outbound_privacy to "full" on a user or device, the 'From' is not changed on an outbound call, it continues to use the user's information instead of 'Anonymous'. Is there a global setting I need to enable?

take a look at the pid header

*rpid or pai that is.

yes, I set default_asserted_identity to 'true' in system_config.callflow.resources doc and I see the P-Asserted-Identity header in the SIP INVITEs going out from Freeswitch to my carrier, which is great, but the 'From' header always contains the user's name and number information, instead of 'Anonymous'.

You'll have to dig a little deeper there if you're looking to change the from header.

ok so by default setting caller-id privacy doesn't change the from header at all? I did notice that if I dial with *67 prefix the from header gets changed to anonymous but then it gets changed again on the outgoing leg to my carrier back to the user's information

If I don't dial with *67 prefix the from header doesn't get changed at all, it's always set to the user's info

You should be able to look in the log and see what is changing the from header on the *67 a setting that will do it. Otherwise setting your rpid or pai just tells the downstream carrier you want to enable privacy but they need the other info for billing.

ok but what I don't understand is if the only thing that happens when you set caller-id privacy to name/number/full is that PAI gets sent, then how does the carrier know whether to block name/number or both if 'From' is retained with the full caller information? I guess you could infer that both should be blocked if PAI is present in the invite, but what about the case of blocking name or number

only?

I thought in each of the three cases name/number/both would be obscured in the 'From' header and then the carrier would use that as caller-ID and PAI is present so that the real caller ID is known for billing purposes etc.

And the other question is why change 'From' to anonymous in the case of dialing with *67 prefix, but not in the case of setting caller-id privacy to name/number/full on the account/user/device? I'm trying to understand if my kazoo instance is not behaving properly or if it's behaving as intended but I'm not understanding something about how it's supposed to work...

The privacy fields should be set in the PAI header. You'll have to dig a little on the way they are handling things.

nlogex: have you check fs logs? ensure Privacy-Hide-Name/Privacy-Hide-Number are appropriate? checked system_config/privacy (method & use_sip_privacy_header)?

fink: when I look at the call log in smartpbx, privacy_hide_name and privacy_hide_number are both set to false in the custom channel vars. I'm guessing this should be true for both because I have 'hide name and number' set on both the device and user config but I can't figure out why it's not. In system_config.privacy, method is set to 'kazoo' and use_sip_privacy_header is set to true.

If I make an API query for the device or user information, "caller_id_options": { "outbound_privacy": "full" } is present in both responses.

is there any changes to installing open source - with the changes to freeswitch repo

Should be pulling FS from the 2600hz repo

i thought so. just figured i'd ask because the rpm does add the freeswitch repo with base: files.freeswitch.org/yum-1.6/$releasever/SRPMS

neurosys: case of the mondays? no upbeat greeting today, eh?

Hahah HAPPY MONDAY!!

rough morning. Up since 4am. 2 planes later and 4 hrs delayed getting to Chicago and been non stop since heh

And it's cold nipple city here

smuggling raisins!