From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============2477359594292158063==" MIME-Version: 1.0 From: Rafael Ignacio Zurita Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 0/3] Long phone numbers Date: Tue, 18 Jan 2011 06:39:09 -0300 Message-ID: <20110118093908.GA20108@nodo3> In-Reply-To: List-Id: To: ofono@ofono.org --===============2477359594292158063== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Mon, Jan 17, 2011 at 11:18:51PM +0200, Pekka Pessi wrote: > Hi Rafael, > = > 2011/1/17 Rafael Ignacio Zurita : > > This is a proposal for the "long phone number" task (80 digits max leng= th). > > It changes OFONO_MAX_PHONE_NUMBER_LENGTH and splits > > common:valid_phone_number_format(), to make sure long numbers are handl= ed > > appropriately for functions that need manage shorter numbers, like > > numbers written to the SIM, or sms SCA. > = > Perhaps a validator and type for long phone numbers is better than for > short numbers? I guess long numbers are mostly used when reporting an > outgoing call back to oFono. No completely sure if it is better. Maybe it is the same?. With a new type for long number we will have modifications on other parts of the code which use OFONO_MAX_PHONE_NUMBER_LENGTH. The first idea could be simpler because we just have one type and would check for the format and length on = the proper places. = > BTW, with call forwarding you could have numbers up to 16 digits or if > longForwardedToNumber is supported (by modem and both home and visited > networks) even 28 digits. See TS 29.002 for merry details. Thanks for that. I am checking, and going to add an extra validator surely. Rafael Zurita --===============2477359594292158063==--