19 Jul
2009
19 Jul
'09
1:20 p.m.
Juha,
On Sat, Jul 18, 2009 at 9:18 PM, Juha Heinanen<jh(a)tutpro.com> wrote:
i have now managed to get all my stuff working using
sr except
t_uac_dlg. t_uac_dlg is not working because for some reason sr tm
module does not implement t_uac_dlg and mi_rpc tells "async mi cmd not
implemented yet".
i would prefer native support of t_uac_dlg in tm module, because the
idea was that sr will use ser tm module. if t_uac is difficult to
implement in ser tm module or if that would still not make t_uac_dlg to
work via rpc, then i guess i need to wait until mi_rpc supports async mi
functions.
otherwise things thus look pretty good to me. thanks for your efforts.
First of all, thanks a lot for your extremely useful testing and integration
efforts.
As far as I can remember, t_uac_dlg (and perhaps other tm functions that are
missing in the tm rpc interface) were not implemented because there was no
way of calling asynchronous callbacks when the function call completes. This
was easy to do with the old fifo and unixsock interfaces, but more complicated
with the xmlrpc interface.
I think that the biggest problem is to decide how do we want to do something
like this with the XML-RPC interface? Should we make the XML-RPC client announce
an IP address and port number for incoming XML-RPC methods to the server and let
the SIP server do a XML-RPC method call on the client?
Or should we perhaps extend XML-RPC in a non standard way and
introduce something
like provisional replies in SIP? (i.e. first the server would send a 100 to
notify the client that the request is being processed and then send a 200 to
notify the client that the request was finished)?
Jan.