I want to write an application that intercepts an outbound call and changes the destination. If I want both the display information and the actual called number changed, would I do it with a SetCalledParty task followed by a ForwardCall task?

Thanks!

Hi Andrew, are you trying to change the display OF the called party (as seen by the caller) or the display SEEN by the called party (of the caller)?

If it's the latter, then you would want to do a SetCallingParty followed by ForwardCall. If it's the former, and your desire is to update the caller's display to show the new far-end, that would generally happen automatically.

Oops...I meant to say SetCalledParty.

I want to change the called name and number. For example:

My Snap-In intercepts an outgoing call with the SIP header: To: “Original User Name” <sip:101@x.com>
I want to ultimately change it to something like: To: “New User Name” <sip:102@x.com>

In other words, I want to change both the SIP URI and the display name.

It seems that ForwardCall only changes the SIP URI and not the name. SetCallledParty allows for both, but it doesn't actually route the call.

So, maybe I could just do SetCalledParty followed by AllowCall?

Is this making sense?

Yes, I think that's what you want to do. Let us know how it goes for you!

I am finally getting around to this and cannot get it to work. I created a call intercept snap-in with two tasks. In Set Called Party, I set the Phone Number to 2301. Next, I have an Allow Call.

I deployed the workflow to a profile that intercepted 2304. I call 2304 from 2305. The snap-in executes, but 2304 always rings. I can never get it to ring 2301.

I did create a snap-in that only did a Forward Call (no Allow Call) and that seems to work. Are there any repercussions to this way of doing it. I thought it would leave 2304 in a forwarded state, but it doesn't seem to.

Anyway, I just want to make sure that Forward is the recommended method to accomplish this. Thanks.

Andrew, you need to do a Forward Call (Engagement Designer) or divertTo (Java) rather than an Allow. Allow will always cause the call to proceed to its original destination. Invoking the task type to Set Called Party will change how the called party's information is displayed to the calling party. It will not affect the destination of the call. Another case where our documentation could probably be better.

Please let me know if you have better luck with Forward Call.

Thanks. Forward is working for me. I just wanted to make sure is was more of a divert function than a traditional forward function. From what you said, it's divert.

Yes, that's right. We debated the right name for the task type and Forward was chosen. Sorry that it threw you off.

I'm happy to hear that your use case is working now!