Page 1 of 1

Inbound and transfers

PostPosted: Sat Mar 15, 2008 9:57 am
by ekaftan
I've been battling with inbound and transfers for some days and don't understand what I'm doing wrong...

I have two inbound queues, Tech and Sales. Some agents man both, but some man only Tech. So far it works and calls get routed fine. Problem is, around 1/3 of calls I get to Tech are really calls to Sales but the customers just pressed the first option on the IVR.

What should I configure to make transfers to the other inbound queue work? So far I tried following the LOAD_BALANCE howto but it does not work. Vicidial calls 90009 and other paramenters, but the agi script then stalls.

This is the dialplan extensions:

exten => _90009.,1,Answer ; Answer the line
exten => _90009.,2,AGI(agi-VDAD_LB_closer.agi,${EXTEN}-----START)
exten => _90009.,3,Hangup

exten => _990009.,1,Answer ; Answer the line
exten => _990009.,2,AGI(agi-VDAD_LO_closer.agi,${EXTEN}-----START)
exten => _990009.,3,Hangup

agiout loops in this lines:

2008-03-15 11:30:50|agi-VDAD_LO_closer.agi|-- VDAD get agent: |0E0||UPDATE vicidial_live_agents set status='QUEU
E',lead_id='4008930',uniqueid='1205591436.47621', channel='Zap/5-1', callerid='Y0315113037004008930' where status I
N('CLOSER','READY') and server_ip='192.168.0.13' and campaign_id REGEXP '(CLOSER|BLEND|INBND|_C$|_B$|_I$)' and clos
er_campaigns LIKE "% %" and last_update_time > '19691231205955' order by last_call_finish limit 1;|
2008-03-15 11:30:50|agi-VDAD_LO_closer.agi|NNNNN No available agent found
2008-03-15 11:30:50|agi-VDAD_LO_closer.agi||SELECT count(*) FROM vicidial_auto_calls where status = 'LIVE' and serv
er_ip!='192.168.0.13' and campaign_id = '' and call_time < "2008-03-15 11:30:50" and lead_id != '4008930';|
2008-03-15 11:30:50|agi-VDAD_LO_closer.agi|-- VDAD get agent: |360|0|0E0|update of vla table: |
2008-03-15 11:30:50|agi-VDAD_LO_closer.agi|NNNNN No available remote agent found

Should I try sending the call back to the _inbound_ agi?

PostPosted: Sun Mar 16, 2008 8:11 am
by mflorell
upgrade to 2.0.4, believe me, it will make all of this a lot easier

PostPosted: Sun Mar 16, 2008 8:19 am
by ekaftan
mflorell wrote:upgrade to 2.0.4, believe me, it will make all of this a lot easier


Im already in 2.0.4 :)

PostPosted: Sun Mar 16, 2008 8:22 am
by mflorell
Then you need to take a look at your dialplan again.

look at the sample extensions.conf in the docs/conf_examples folder for 90009 and 990009, they need to be using the new ag-VDAD_ALL_inbound script with the CLOSER flag instead.

PostPosted: Sun Mar 16, 2008 9:19 am
by ekaftan
mflorell wrote:Then you need to take a look at your dialplan again.

look at the sample extensions.conf in the docs/conf_examples folder for 90009 and 990009, they need to be using the new ag-VDAD_ALL_inbound script with the CLOSER flag instead.


Ok. Load balance doc is not uptodate then.

I'll test the extensions and report.

Should I do a 9009.... for each inbound group? or will it be autodetected?

PostPosted: Sat Mar 29, 2008 12:54 pm
by seaq
Hi i've got the same doubt too.

How can i handle transfers to several different IN-GROUPS?

thks

PostPosted: Sun Mar 30, 2008 7:42 pm
by mflorell
Sorry about the out-of-date docs, I have focused mostly on SVN trunk lately, but I will try to update the 2.0.4 tree docs as I get ready for the 2.0.4.1 release.

Transferring to several different in-groups is not that difficult, you just need to select "Allow Closers = Y" in your campaign, and then check the boxes for the in-groups that you want those agents in that campaign to be able to send calls to.

PostPosted: Mon Mar 31, 2008 3:29 pm
by seaq
Yeah but i've got doubts about how to use the _990009. and _90009. extensions should i create one ingroup, put everyone in there and configure the 90009 extensions with that ingroup?

isn't a problem that this ingroup is not the one that i'm transfering the call to?

PostPosted: Tue Apr 01, 2008 7:48 pm
by mflorell
The in-group set in the 90009 and 990009 extensions(or anything marked as a CLOSER type for that matter) do not matter at all and are not even parsed. ou can leave them blank.

PostPosted: Wed Apr 02, 2008 9:48 pm
by seaq
hmm, well that explains why i cannot see much difference between using a real ingroup in there or a non existant one.

i've got to dig more in the code...