DeadAGI vs AGI
Page 1 of 1

Author:  payodie [ Mon Mar 19, 2012 12:17 am ]
Post subject:  DeadAGI vs AGI

I am currently building a new system based on freepbx running Asterisk and A2Billing 1.9.4 and have been testing DeadAGI vs. AGI.

Of course if I use DeadAGI I get the “WARNING[29526] res_agi.c: DeadAGI has been deprecated, please use AGI in all cases!” error in the logs, this goes away if I use AGI in the extensions_custom.conf file. On previous versions of Asterisk/A2Billing I have noted that calls do not get billed properly if I use AGI so I have always ignored the warning. In my limited testing using the new system it seems that the AGI option now works properly now as calls are being billed using AGI.

Can anyone (jroper perhaps) confirm that AGI is now the correct way to go, or should I continue to use DeadAGI?

Author:  vulcan [ Fri Mar 23, 2012 11:46 am ]
Post subject:  Re: DeadAGI vs AGI

AGI engine replaces DeadAGI on newer versions of Asterisk and is backward compatible. It would appear AGI is a lot more stable today and can be used in production with the latest releases.

Based on my experience with A2B and Asterisk, it should not matter whether you used DeadAGI or AGI if both are bug free. The simple reason is that when A2b receives a call and plays prompts, it holds this inbound channel until the caller hangs up or A2B terminates this inbound leg. This is contrary to the common belief that a2b cannot do database updates and the like after the callee/caller hangs up.

All the channel variables are available on the inbound leg and even a copy of those created for the outbound leg. So when the callee/caller hangs up, A2B detects hangup and is armed with all the info. A2B attemps to hangup the inbound at the end of the script. In summary, billing is the same so long as AGI is not buggy.

Some have said AGI is faster.

Page 1 of 1 All times are UTC
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group