Hi Andrei!
I'm still not sure for the correct usage.
If I got it right, set_forward_* is for relaying of messages (regardless if it is a request or reponse) and set_reply_* is for local generated replies (explicit in script or implicit somewhere in a module)
Is this correct?
regards klaus
Andrei Pelinescu-Onciul schrieb:
On Sep 21, 2009 at 12:16, Klaus Darilion klaus.mailinglists@pernau.at wrote:
Great!
I have documented the new function. http://sip-router.org/wiki/cookbooks/core-cookbook/devel#set_forward_no_conn...
Thanks!
Andrei, please verify if I understood correct and the examples are correct.
Yes, they are correct. There are some differences if you use them in other type of routes. For example in onsend_routes and branch routes, only the set_forward* work and they will apply only to the current message / current branch.
E.g.: onsend_route{ if(to_ip!=10.0.0.0/8){ #only reuse connection for IPs outside the local net set_foward_no_connect(); } }
In a reply route they will apply only to the current reply (so you will see their effect only if the current reply "wins" and it's forwarded).
As you said set_*_close() must be used with care (and in general they should be avoided). Especially dangerous is the combination of set_*_close() and set_*_no_connect() (it works only once, after that no further messages can be forwarded to the same destination). The primary purpose of set_*_close() is for xmlrpc use (work around against the python xmlrpc client bug).
I suspect those functions work with TLS too? What about SCTP?
Yes, they work with TLS. They don't work yet with SCTP (but I'll add support for them to SCTP later).
What happens if the functions are called for UDP transport - I hope they will be ignored and do not make noisy log-statements.
Nothing, they are ignored.
Andrei