Remove buggy function to add "Call-ID" AVP which actually doesn't exists on SAR Diameter Message According to TS129.229, it actually exists "Call-ID-Sip-Header" AVP witch code 643 which is grouped into "Subscription-Info" AVP. According to the same TS, this AVP is used for restoration procedure. You can view, comment on, or merge this pull request online at:
https://github.com/kamailio/kamailio/pull/659
-- Commit Summary --
* ims_registrar_scscf: Remove buggy AVP from SAR
-- File Changes --
M modules/ims_registrar_scscf/cxdx_avp.c (11) M modules/ims_registrar_scscf/cxdx_avp.h (1) M modules/ims_registrar_scscf/cxdx_sar.c (1)
-- Patch Links --
https://github.com/kamailio/kamailio/pull/659.patch https://github.com/kamailio/kamailio/pull/659.diff
--- You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread. Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: https://github.com/kamailio/kamailio/pull/659
I guess @jaybeepee, @richardgood or @ngvoice want to check before merging.
--- You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread. Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: https://github.com/kamailio/kamailio/pull/659#issuecomment-224200204
yup, checking
On Tue, 7 Jun 2016 at 09:20 Daniel-Constantin Mierla < notifications@github.com> wrote:
I guess @jaybeepee https://github.com/jaybeepee, @richardgood https://github.com/richardgood or @ngvoice https://github.com/ngvoice want to check before merging.
—
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub https://github.com/kamailio/kamailio/pull/659#issuecomment-224200204, or mute the thread https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe/AF36ZVGkKEL7OPDFOeSxp2dlbXK99nRyks5qJRuogaJpZM4Iu6pk .
sr-dev mailing list sr-dev@lists.sip-router.org http://lists.sip-router.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sr-dev
Any feedback regarding this ?
--- You are receiving this because you commented. Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: https://github.com/kamailio/kamailio/pull/659#issuecomment-226109633
Any comment by @jaybeepee, @richardgood or @ngvoice? Eventually can be made optional with a modparam instead of complete remove if someone still finds it useful for some cases.
--- You are receiving this because you commented. Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: https://github.com/kamailio/kamailio/pull/659#issuecomment-227079086
Eventually, if really needed, i can try to find some time to modify the Pull Request in order to introduce a modparam. The point is that, as far as i understand, the AVP does not follow any (known to me at least) 3gpp or RFC specs...so is pointless to add it as it is, if not used against a "custom" HSS that needs this AVP
--- You are receiving this because you commented. Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: https://github.com/kamailio/kamailio/pull/659#issuecomment-227084805
Apologies Frederico, I've been swamped. Will take a look today
--- You are receiving this because you commented. Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: https://github.com/kamailio/kamailio/pull/659#issuecomment-227392322
Still nothing?
--- You are receiving this because you commented. Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: https://github.com/kamailio/kamailio/pull/659#issuecomment-228311665
If you introduce a nod parameters, then I can step in and merge. If someone needs old behaviour, nothing is lost.
--- You are receiving this because you commented. Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: https://github.com/kamailio/kamailio/pull/659#issuecomment-228319176
Sorry if i insist on the point...but really i do not see the point in leaving such AVP. To me is sufficient a feedback like "Our HSS is caring about this AVP, because we have a custom HSS that....etc...etc". I will close the PR or add a modparam and that's ok. This way we can for sure have a fallback, but basically we are mantaining an "out-of-standard" thing (that, btw, even wireshark doesn't decode) without knowing if it is really needed or not.
Anyway, copy that, with low priority i will try to find some time to add a modparam if really needed
--- You are receiving this because you commented. Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: https://github.com/kamailio/kamailio/pull/659#issuecomment-228334020
Frederico, the problem is that the code is already in ..... there could be other ppl using it, so I think it would be unfair to just remove it. We have 2 solutions here:
1. move to a modparam. 2. move it to a vendor-specific AVP
Finally, we will need to find someone who has time/priority to get this done... if you are worried only about the std, then I think it's a low priority. If it's affecting your ability to use Kamailio, then it's of course higher priority.
On Fri, 24 Jun 2016 at 14:34 Federico Favaro notifications@github.com wrote:
Sorry if i insist on the point...but really i do not see the point in leaving such AVP. To me is sufficient a feedback like "Our HSS is caring about this AVP, because we have a custom HSS that....etc...etc". I will close the PR or add a modparam and that's ok. This way we can for sure have a fallback, but basically we are mantaining an "out-of-standard" thing (that, btw, even wireshark doesn't decode) without knowing if it is really needed or not.
Anyway, copy that, with low priority i will try to find some time to add a modparam if really needed
— You are receiving this because you were mentioned.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub https://github.com/kamailio/kamailio/pull/659#issuecomment-228334020, or mute the thread https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe/ABI0d_gufKE3DAJL36sFWo9tepQP1C0Qks5qO85EgaJpZM4Iu6pk .
--- You are receiving this because you commented. Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: https://github.com/kamailio/kamailio/pull/659#issuecomment-228335790
I've added a mod-param version for now and checked-in to master. When I find some time to dig through specs, I will add the std version.
--- You are receiving this because you commented. Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: https://github.com/kamailio/kamailio/pull/659#issuecomment-228359694
Closed #659.
--- You are receiving this because you commented. Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: https://github.com/kamailio/kamailio/pull/659#event-703256058
BTW, Frederico, you will see the AVP is marked as vendor-specific already... which is why wireshark will not decode...
Trace some big vendor's diameter interfaces and you will see plenty of non-parseable avps in wireshark traces ;)
--- You are receiving this because you commented. Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: https://github.com/kamailio/kamailio/pull/659#issuecomment-228362893
-
Daniel-Constantin Mierla -
Federico Favaro
-
Jason Penton -
jaybeepee