Jonners, my point was: syntax of "display_name"<sip:extension@provider
ort> is standardized, while content of "display_name" isn't. So, from this point of view, there is no fault, no bug, no mistake from nobody, phone, provider, PBX, since everybody respects the SIP syntax. Therefore, we don't discuss here a bug, but a feature request.
Now: a PBX is a transport link in the chain between sender and end-point; perhaps the most important rule (not standard, but rule) to be obeyed by such a link is to preserve integrity of the original input data. That's because this data has semantic, significance, for the end-point. Usually, this data is altered by adding, not by stripping. My caller ID is Vali, 3CX, not "Vali, 3CX", quotes were added. Data processing is performed by the end-point, once it has been received entirely.
First case, one PBX: your phone is smart enough to store all incoming calls from caller ID's starting with "3CX:" into a dedicated folder. Therefore, I set my caller Id as 3CX:Vali. If PBX's admin decide to strip from caller ID's anything before ":", you will get a call from Vali, and your phone's ability will be useless.
Case two, the same example, but two providers involved: I have my caller ID set to Vali, since my PBX will add, by preserving it, the "3CX:" prefix. Your smart phone is connected to bubuprovider.com, to which my PBX is conected. But this provider decide to strip from caller ID's anything before ":" So, when I'm calling you as Vali, my PBX will format "3CX:Vali", which will be passed to the bubuprovider.com which will strip "3CX:" and you will get a call from Vali. Who's fault? Is nobody's fault, since we dont discuss a standard, but what we would like to have.
Sorry for long explanation :mrgreen:
Regards
vali