T42G: BLF visual alert not showing callee name from LDAP phonebook

[Lasse]

Hi,

We have an issue with firmware 29.81.0.110, 29.81.0.70 and 29.81.0.25 (T42G) when using the LDAP phonebook:
- A (201) calls B (202) while C (203) monitors
- C gets BLF popup showing 202 <- A

Our LDAP lookup settings in the phone:
- LDAP Lookup For Incoming Call: enabled
- LDAP Lookup For Callout: enabled

It works fine when using an ordinary remote phone book. So it's similar but not identical to the bug posted in the following thread: http://forum.yealink.com/forum/showthread.php?tid=35619

Any idea on how to fix this?

Thanks in advance,
Lasse


PS: pcap and bin attached, this is the level 6 log:
==> ./ipvp.log <==
2017-07-19T15:16:36+02:00 192.168.30.90 ipvp[1258]: IPVP<5+notice> 396.409.488:Message=0x00000001(0x00000000+0x00000000+0)
2017-07-19T15:17:36+02:00 192.168.30.90 ipvp[1258]: IPVP<5+notice> 456.409.492:Message=0x00000001(0x00000000+0x00000000+0)
2017-07-19T15:18:36+02:00 192.168.30.90 ipvp[1258]: IPVP<5+notice> 516.409.492:Message=0x00000001(0x00000000+0x00000000+0)

[anonymous1718628087441]

(07-19-2017 09:12 AM)Lasse Wrote:  Hi,

We have an issue with firmware 29.81.0.110, 29.81.0.70 and 29.81.0.25 (T42G) when using the LDAP phonebook:
- A (201) calls B (202) while C (203) monitors
- C gets BLF popup showing 202 <- A

Our LDAP lookup settings in the phone:
- LDAP Lookup For Incoming Call: enabled
- LDAP Lookup For Callout: enabled

It works fine when using an ordinary remote phone book. So it's similar but not identical to the bug posted in the following thread: http://forum.yealink.com/forum/showthread.php?tid=35619

Any idea on how to fix this?

Thanks in advance,
Lasse


PS: pcap and bin attached, this is the level 6 log:
==> ./ipvp.log <==
2017-07-19T15:16:36+02:00 192.168.30.90 ipvp[1258]: IPVP<5+notice> 396.409.488:Message=0x00000001(0x00000000+0x00000000+0)
2017-07-19T15:17:36+02:00 192.168.30.90 ipvp[1258]: IPVP<5+notice> 456.409.492:Message=0x00000001(0x00000000+0x00000000+0)
2017-07-19T15:18:36+02:00 192.168.30.90 ipvp[1258]: IPVP<5+notice> 516.409.492:Message=0x00000001(0x00000000+0x00000000+0)

Dear Lasse,
Would you please try below linked firmware and let me know if it works?
http://ftp.yealink.com/?ShareToken=57748...801DF98D8F
Kind Regards
Samuel Wang

[Lasse]

Dear Samuel,

Thanks for getting back to me! Unfortunately the result is exactly the same with firmware 29.81.0.27: the caller's number is replaced by his name, but the callee's number is not.

Best regards,
Lasse

[anonymous1718628087441]

(07-24-2017 12:48 PM)Lasse Wrote:  Dear Samuel,

Thanks for getting back to me! Unfortunately the result is exactly the same with firmware 29.81.0.27: the caller's number is replaced by his name, but the callee's number is not.

Best regards,
Lasse

Dear Lasse,
Sorry for being late, would you please reproduce this issue and send me the config.bin file, pcap trace file and syslog on level 6 so I can look into this issue?
Kind Regards
Samuel Wang

[Lasse]

Dear Samuel,

Sorry for getting back to you this late. I mailed you the requested files. We also encounter this issue with our T46G phones by the way, also after updating to firmware 82.0.20.rom.

Don't hesitate to contact me if you need anything else.

Best regards,
Lasse

[Lasse]

I'm guessing the most relevant bit from the pcap is the SIP notify message received by the observer:

Code:

<?xml version="1.0"?>
<dialog-info xmlns="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:dialog-info" version="17" state="full" entity="sip:178@192.168.30.10:5060">
<dialog id="178" call-id="pickup-1_356861945@192.168.30.80" local-tag="2614982855" remote-tag="as24721da5" direction="recipient">
<remote>
<identity display="DRANCO secretariaat">sip:ows-305@192.168.30.10</identity>
<target uri="sip:ows-305@192.168.30.10"/>
</remote>
<local>
<identity display="">sip:178@192.168.30.10</identity>
<target uri="sip:178@192.168.30.10"/>
</local>
<state>early</state>
</dialog>
</dialog-info>

The observer receiving the info above gets to see "178 <- DRANCO secretariaat" in his notification pop-up. Is the phone-number 178 supposed to be looked up by the phone using LDAP or should the SIP server always provide the identity information? Would be great if the phone would do the look-up.