[OpenSER-Users] Re: [Serusers] enum_query from failure route

JF jfkavaka at gmail.com
Thu Jul 12 12:08:37 CEST 2007


So, if I want to perform some less simple (e.g. enum_query) processing
on failed requests, I should loop the request through SER again and do
it in request route?

Not a very nice way to solve it. One more Record-Route, bigger
message... parsing the whole thing again.

Andrei, what exactly is the problem regarding long processing in
failure route, and what could be done to fix it?

Thanks,
JF

On 7/11/07, Jiri Kuthan <jiri at iptel.org> wrote:
> At 21:22 11/07/2007, Martin Hoffmann wrote:
> >Jiri Kuthan wrote:
> >> At 16:41 11/07/2007, JF wrote:
> >> >
> >> >Is there any particular reason why enum_query cannot be called from
> >> >FAILURE_ROUTE?
> >>
> >> Not sure. I think it is possible to turn it on but possibly ENUM's processing
> >> latency may conflict with the failure_route located in the middle of
> >> transaction
> >> processing and lead to some blocknig conditions, current TM
> >> maintainer, Andrei, will
> >> certainly know better.
> >
> >In short: There may be dragons there.
> >
> >Anyways, I am not sure what you want to do, but you can usually skip the
> >problem by fixing the Request-URI and sprialing the call to yourself.
> >
> >For instance, if call forwarding is what you're after, instead of
> >re-setting the target and just running processing again, you can just
> >stuff the URI you want to forward to in the Request-URI and call
> >t_relay() (don't forget the append_branch() if in a failure_route).
> >
> >As a rule, keep failure and onreply routes simple. Actually, as a rule,
> >keep your config simple (Though simple does not necessarly mean short).
>
> Indeed: KISS applies to ser.cfg very well.
>
> -jiri
>
>
>
>
> --
> Jiri Kuthan            http://iptel.org/~jiri/
>
> _______________________________________________
> Serusers mailing list
> Serusers at lists.iptel.org
> http://lists.iptel.org/mailman/listinfo/serusers
>




More information about the Users mailing list