[I see I posted this to -dev instead of -users; fixing that -JimC]
When using rewrite_ruri() and append_branch() to set a list of next hops to try, what is the proper syntax to specify that a given route should use tcp or tls/tcp?
I've mostly used a single next hop via t_relay_to_tcp() or t_relay_to_tls(), but need route stacks now.
-JimC
Hello,
do you need to insert Route headers? Or just set R-URI with a specific transport such as tcp or tls?
Cheers, Daniel
On 18.08.17 21:20, James Cloos wrote:
[I see I posted this to -dev instead of -users; fixing that -JimC]
When using rewrite_ruri() and append_branch() to set a list of next hops to try, what is the proper syntax to specify that a given route should use tcp or tls/tcp?
I've mostly used a single next hop via t_relay_to_tcp() or t_relay_to_tls(), but need route stacks now.
-JimC
Daniel-Constantin Mierla miconda@gmail.com writes:
do you need to insert Route headers? Or just set R-URI with a specific transport such as tcp or tls?
My current code does things like:
append_hf("P-Original-IP: $pr $si $sp \r\n"); append_urihf("CC-Diversion: ", "\r\n"); setuser("agent99"); t_relay_to_tls("nexthop.example.net", "5061");
The goal is to return a prioritized list of username,host,protocol tuples and call rewrite_ruri() for the highest priority tuple followed by append_branch for each subsequent tuple in the set. And then let tm handle trying each tuple until one works. The two append_ calls are expected to remain.
I'll be doing a sql call which will return one such tuple per row.
Most of the tuples will specify tls, but a subset will need tcp or udp. Or *maybe* even sctp or wss.
-JimC
-
Daniel-Constantin Mierla -
James Cloos