21 Jan
2010
21 Jan
'10
7:04 p.m.
forgotten to cc the list :-)
Klaus Darilion schrieb:
Aymeric Moizard schrieb:
On Thu, 21 Jan 2010, Klaus Darilion wrote:
Then my first comment would be: why have the "pa" been removed if it's
not possible to use the presence module from kamailio...
I think you can (I have not tried, but it should work, maybe needs some
tuning) - as presence tables are not related to provisioning/location
tables. But it is more work.
Aymeric Moizard schrieb:
[...]
Last
general question: What about mixing kamailio & ser? I've seen
for example modules with same namings: "auth" and "auth_db" in both
modules_s & modules_k: does this means we can use the same core but
have to choose between using modules_s or modules_k?
You can mix, but not arbitrarily. The biggest difference between ser
and kamailio is the database structure. ser uses a new database
schema with numeric user-ids which map to SIP AoR. kamailio still
uses the old (ser 0.9.x) database schema where every user has a fixed
AoR.
Therefore you can not mix modules which require different database
layouts.
Thus, in your scenario you have to mix database layouts:
provisioning/location from ser and presence from kamailio. That might
work. But probably much easier would be to use kamailio modules only
(unless you need numeric user ids). In my mind, presence & presence_xml are using
different independant
database table and doesn't conflict with ser database?
Most probably, there could be conflict with modules that depends
on usrloc for example? (like pua_usrloc) Looking at developper APIs,
for both usrloc kam/ser modules they are very close.
Agreed.
I don't fully understand yet what
"numeric user ids" are, but I would
really like to use the ser database layout for
user/location/credentials which seems really flexible compared to
kamailio.
So where sip-router is going? Do you target to have only the same
core for both kamailio & ser, but still be different projects?
There is already the same "core". But different database schema (used by
modules)
Is having a common database layout an objective
of the sip-router
project?
I think this is not agreed yet. But as it is planned to merge common
modules, this probably includes merging the schema too.
The problem is existing schemas. Although ser's schema is more flexible,
users avoid changing their existing schema (as this impacts the whole
provisioning/billing subsystems).
If I intent to implement to additionnal event
package, do you advise
me to stick with kamailio subscriber layout?
Do you need subscriber layout for the presence module? Maybe you can
describe your module a bit more.
I finally understood why my "make deb"
was compiling a ser version:
I just forgot to checkout the kamailio branch... That was also a
source of confusion for understanding why normal step for the
kamailio branch was to setup a ser database layout... Because
of that error, I though first the same layout was already used...
This is what I do to build kamailio:
git clone ..uri...
cd sip-router
git branch --track kamailio_3.0 origin/kamailio_3.0
git checkout kamailio_3.0
make deb
regards
klaus
Tks,
Aymeric MOIZARD / ANTISIP
amsip - http://www.antisip.com
osip2 - http://www.osip.org
eXosip2 - http://savannah.nongnu.org/projects/exosip/
> regards
> klaus
>
>>
>> Tks much for your help & advise,
>>
>> Aymeric MOIZARD / ANTISIP
>> amsip - http://www.antisip.com
>> osip2 - http://www.osip.org
>> eXosip2 - http://savannah.nongnu.org/projects/exosip/
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> sr-dev mailing list
>> sr-dev(a)lists.sip-router.org
>> http://lists.sip-router.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sr-dev
>