I have an IVR 1234 that plays a message.
I have an outbound route for 3+ digits to out to SIP provider.
I have a Destination for a direct dial.
If I assign an inbound route for this direct dial to an extension, it works [Note that the extensions are not numeric, so cannot accidentally match this outbound route!].
If I assign an inbound route to the IVR 1234, the inbound call gets routed out. The logs indicate that the IVR 1234 is failing the user_exists test. The outbound route has "condition ${user_exists} false". So this kind of makes sense.
If I edit my outbound route to match on 5+ digits instead, then the inbound call to the IVR works. But I am not clear if this is the expected behaviour. Why doesn't the IVR 1234 pass the "exists" test?
I have an outbound route for 3+ digits to out to SIP provider.
I have a Destination for a direct dial.
If I assign an inbound route for this direct dial to an extension, it works [Note that the extensions are not numeric, so cannot accidentally match this outbound route!].
If I assign an inbound route to the IVR 1234, the inbound call gets routed out. The logs indicate that the IVR 1234 is failing the user_exists test. The outbound route has "condition ${user_exists} false". So this kind of makes sense.
If I edit my outbound route to match on 5+ digits instead, then the inbound call to the IVR works. But I am not clear if this is the expected behaviour. Why doesn't the IVR 1234 pass the "exists" test?