24 Sep
2009
24 Sep
'09
2:28 p.m.
On Sep 24, 2009 at 13:06, Alex Hermann <alex(a)speakup.nl> wrote:
Yes, using it now directly in production would be risky.
This code in tm comes from ser 2.1 where it was tested (and is used in
production).
k 3.0 and sip-router as a whole, did see quite little testing until now,
but hopefully they will see much more in the next month.
Yes.
Andrei
On Thursday 24 September 2009, Andrei Pelinescu-Onciul
wrote:
We gladly accept patches :-)
The case when it wouldn't work is a corner case (how many of you use
mhomed=1 in the cfg?) and even in that case is unlikely that it would
cause problem (I could of course come with a scenario where it will
cause problems, but the likelihood of encountering it is quite low
IMHO). Making it work in all the cases would also add a bigger
performance hit.
By default sip-router tm
uses exactly what was sent on the last branch when doing dns failover.
See
http://sip-router.org/docbook/sip-router/branch/master/modules/tm/tm.html
#reparse_on_dns_failover
The documented limitations make this seem like a hack.
Why not make sure it
works all the time? So this should solve the header added in a branch
route and not
preserved on dns failover and you don't have to add anything to the
script (provided you use sip-router or kamailio 3.0).
Well, it's a bit early
to use that in production, isn't it? One thing to note though, is that branch route is
not called when doing
dns failover, if reparse_on_dns_failover is set to 1.
If set to 0, will it call
branch route for every DNS-based branch? Even if
it is the result of an internally generate 408?