[FEATURE] Select "type" of gateway during route_to_carrier() in drouting.

[osgjps]

Is your feature request related to a problem? Please describe.

If you have different types of gateways such as inbound, outbound, or inbound/outbound defined on a single carrier, there is no way of telling route_to_carrier() to not select inappropriate types of gateways (i.e. sending an outbound call to an inbound only gateway).

Describe the solution you'd like

To be able to pass a type selector to route_to_carrier() that allows inclusion of only the specified types of gateways.

Implementation

• Component: drouting
• Type: additional optional parameter on route_to_carrier()

Describe alternatives you've considered

No other viable alternative exists. This course of action was recommended by Vlad.

Additional context

[osgjps]

#3810

[bogdan-iancu]

Hi @osgjps , it seems to me like a bit of a false problem. If you don;t want a certain GW to get traffic, simply do not route to it - do not point to it (directly or via carrier) from a routing rule.
If a carrier has IN and OUT gws, maybe simply define 2 carrier records like CARRIER_X_IN and CARRIER_X_OUT - and you can use CARRIER_X_IN for sending the traffic to, while the GWs you place in CARRIER_X_OUT may be labeled as out type, so you can check them only (without routing to).

[osgjps]

Having multiple carrier accounts for the same overall carrier is what I was trying to avoid. If I have multiple carrier accounts, then I have to maintain a separate one->many lookup system when it comes to management. Like right now I have a carrier who has separate gateways for incoming traffic, dialer traffic, and conversational traffic. That means I need 3 separate carrier entries that will have to be maintained & updated by my GUI front end, rather than just one account with multiple gateways.

[vladpaiu]

think what is the point here is that he is trying to make route_to_carrier be 'symmetric' in functionality with is_from_gw ( which already is able to filter based on gateway type ), so the idea is 'filter in based on gw type' vs 'being able to filter out based on gw type'

[bogdan-iancu]

ok, I can accept this argument, let's go back to PR.

[github-actions]

Any updates here? No progress has been made in the last 15 days, marking as stale. Will close this issue if no further updates are made in the next 30 days.

[github-actions]

Marking as closed due to lack of progress for more than 30 days. If this issue is still relevant, please re-open it with additional details.