3 Jan
2013
3 Jan
'13
5:32 p.m.
Now that we have worked to integrate modules_s and modules_k I find it a tiny bit
disturbing to have dialog and dialog2.
What's the major difference? Would it be impossible to integrate?
/O
3 Jan
3 Jan
5:35 p.m.
Olle E. Johansson writes:
Now that we have worked to integrate modules_s and
modules_k I find it
a tiny bit disturbing to have dialog and dialog2.
if modules are integrated, why there is still modules and modules_k
directories?
also, it would make sense to have core directory that holds core files.
-- juha
6:14 p.m.
On 03.01.2013 16:32, Olle E. Johansson wrote:
Now that we have worked to integrate modules_s and
modules_k I find it a tiny bit disturbing to have dialog and dialog2.
What's the major difference? Would it be impossible to integrate?
Wasn't dialog2 just a recent commit (together with the IMS commits) and
is a completely new module, and has nothing to do with ser?
klaus
6:40 p.m.
Hi All,
Dialog2 is a start at the following:
http://www.kamailio.org/dokuwiki/doku.php/modules-new-design:dialog-module-…
We needed this functionality for the IMS modules. In IMS a proxy can take
the same session in both terminating and originating modes (ie 2 dialogs
for the same session). dialog 1 does not support this. Dialog2 has been
tested to at least support the functionality we required and we will build
on it as we move along.
Docs are coming but please be patient - we are really busy at the moment,
not just with ser/kamailio.
Cheers
Jason
On Thu, Jan 3, 2013 at 6:14 PM, Klaus Darilion <klaus.mailinglists(a)pernau.at
wrote:
On 03.01.2013 16:32, Olle E. Johansson wrote:
Now that we have worked to integrate modules_s
and modules_k I find it a
tiny bit disturbing to have dialog and dialog2.
What's the major difference? Would it be impossible to integrate?
Wasn't dialog2 just a recent commit (together with the IMS commits) and is
a completely new module, and has nothing to do with ser?
klaus
______________________________**_________________
sr-dev mailing list
sr-dev(a)lists.sip-router.org
http://lists.sip-router.org/**cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sr-**dev<http://l…
6:45 p.m.
3 jan 2013 kl. 17:40 skrev Jason Penton <jason.penton(a)gmail.com>om>:
Hi All,
Dialog2 is a start at the following:
http://www.kamailio.org/dokuwiki/doku.php/modules-new-design:dialog-module-…
We needed this functionality for the IMS modules. In IMS a proxy can take the same
session in both terminating and originating modes (ie 2 dialogs for the same session).
dialog 1 does not support this. Dialog2 has been tested to at least support the
functionality we required and we will build on it as we move along.
Docs are coming but please be patient - we are really busy at the moment, not just with
ser/kamailio.
The question is if Dialog2 - as a superset - can handle the same stuff that dialog1 does?
/O
6:49 p.m.
Right now it would be impossible if we want to be backwards compatible. I
suppose we could look at pre processor defines to decide which version to
use, but this could be equally as messy
--
This email was sent using my phone and may be brief, to the point or
contain typos
--
On Jan 3, 2013 6:45 PM, "Olle E. Johansson" <oej(a)edvina.net> wrote:
3 jan 2013 kl. 17:40 skrev Jason Penton <jason.penton(a)gmail.com>om>:
Hi All,
Dialog2 is a start at the following:
http://www.kamailio.org/dokuwiki/doku.php/modules-new-design:dialog-module-…
We needed this functionality for the IMS modules. In IMS a proxy can take
the same session in both terminating and originating modes (ie 2 dialogs
for the same session). dialog 1 does not support this. Dialog2 has been
tested to at least support the functionality we required and we will build
on it as we move along.
Docs are coming but please be patient - we are really busy at the moment,
not just with ser/kamailio.
The question is if Dialog2 - as a superset - can handle the same stuff
that dialog1 does?
/O
_______________________________________________
sr-dev mailing list
sr-dev(a)lists.sip-router.org
http://lists.sip-router.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sr-dev
10:35 p.m.
3 jan 2013 kl. 17:49 skrev Jason Penton <jason.penton(a)gmail.com>om>:
Right now it would be impossible if we want to be
backwards compatible. I suppose we could look at pre processor defines to decide which
version to use, but this could be equally as messy
Defines doesn't make sense. Can we rename dialog2 to ims-dialog so people
understand that it's special for IMS?
/O
10:46 p.m.
If the intent is to replace the current dialog implementation with
this one or if the dialog2 is not ims specific, then we should
rename-it to dialog-ng.
-ovidiu
On Thu, Jan 3, 2013 at 3:35 PM, Olle E. Johansson <oej(a)edvina.net> wrote:
3 jan 2013 kl. 17:49 skrev Jason Penton <jason.penton(a)gmail.com>om>:
Right now it would be impossible if we want to be backwards compatible. I
suppose we could look at pre processor defines to decide which version to
use, but this could be equally as messy
Defines doesn't make sense. Can we rename dialog2 to ims-dialog so people
understand that it's special for IMS?
/O
10:54 p.m.
3 jan 2013 kl. 21:46 skrev Ovidiu Sas <osas(a)voipembedded.com>om>:
If the intent is to replace the current dialog
implementation with
this one or if the dialog2 is not ims specific, then we should
rename-it to dialog-ng.
Agree. So we need to figure out where we are heading with this so we
can communicate this properly to our users.
/O
-ovidiu
On Thu, Jan 3, 2013 at 3:35 PM, Olle E. Johansson <oej(a)edvina.net> wrote:
3 jan 2013 kl. 17:49 skrev Jason Penton <jason.penton(a)gmail.com>om>:
Right now it would be impossible if we want to be backwards compatible. I
suppose we could look at pre processor defines to decide which version to
use, but this could be equally as messy
Defines doesn't make sense. Can we rename dialog2 to ims-dialog so people
understand that it's special for IMS?
/O
_______________________________________________
sr-dev mailing list
sr-dev(a)lists.sip-router.org
http://lists.sip-router.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sr-dev
6:43 p.m.
3 jan 2013 kl. 17:14 skrev Klaus Darilion <klaus.mailinglists(a)pernau.at>at>:
On 03.01.2013 16:32, Olle E. Johansson wrote:
Right, which is a bit annoying unless it's really impossible to merge them... At least
it would be good for my curiousity to get an
explanation :-)
/O
Now that we have worked to integrate modules_s
and modules_k I find it a tiny bit disturbing to have dialog and dialog2.
What's the major difference? Would it be impossible to integrate?
Wasn't dialog2 just a recent commit (together with the IMS commits) and is a
completely new module, and has nothing to do with ser?
4344
days inactive
4344
days old
9 comments
5 participants
participants (5)
-
Jason Penton -
Juha Heinanen -
Klaus Darilion -
Olle E. Johansson -
Ovidiu Sas