10 Oct
2023
10 Oct
'23
9:32 p.m.
10 Oct 2023 19:24:55 Alex Balashov via sr-users <sr-users(a)lists.kamailio.org>rg>:
I would reiterate that in doing this, you may be
boxing yourself into only supporting Q-value and $du as parameters, more or less.
If that fits your design parameters, cool. However, if additional future route options
are a possibility, you'd be better off with a generic XAVP approach. It's more
work up front, but will pay dividends if you decide you need another attribute, and then
another, and another...
Thanks Alex. What I am thinking of is not to put the nh proxy into the tag directly, but
instead a reference to an xavp, so the xavp could be expanded if needed in future.
-Barry
-- Alex
-Barry Flanagan
On 10 Oct 2023, at 13:47, Barry Flanagan via
sr-users <sr-users(a)lists.kamailio.org> wrote:
10 Oct 2023 18:12:10 Ben Kaufman via sr-users <sr-users(a)lists.kamailio.org>rg>:
--
Alex Balashov
Principal Consultant
Evariste Systems LLC
Web: https://evaristesys.com
Tel: +1-706-510-6800
__________________________________________________________
Kamailio - Users Mailing List - Non Commercial Discussions
To unsubscribe send an email to sr-users-leave(a)lists.kamailio.org
Important: keep the mailing list in the recipients, do not reply only to the sender!
Edit mailing list options or unsubscribe: Probably better to use an xavp with the ruri as
the key.
Yes, except ruri can be the same, with only the next hop proxy and q-value changing :-(
I will work on adding a Param to ruri before append_branch containing the next hop and
deal with it in failure_route.
Thanks for all the replies!