> On June 28, 2014, 8:35 p.m., Matt Jordan wrote:
> > /branches/11/res/res_rtp_asterisk.c, lines 1061-1079
> > <https://reviewboard.asterisk.org/r/3679/diff/1/?file=61060#file61060line1061>
> >
> >     Does this leak read_BIO and write_BIO on the rtp/rtcp structs?


> On June 28, 2014, 8:35 p.m., Matt Jordan wrote:
> > /branches/11/res/res_rtp_asterisk.c, lines 868-882
> > <https://reviewboard.asterisk.org/r/3679/diff/1/?file=61060#file61060line868>
> >
> >     I'd create a shared routine that correctly disposes of these three 
> > objects on either the rtp or rtcp struct.

The only time these three need to be individually destroyed is during setup. 
Once associated with the structure the SSL_free function will also free the 
read_bio and write_bio.

>From the OpenSSL documentation:

SSL_free() also calls the free()ing procedures for indirectly affected items, 
if applicable: the buffering BIO, the read and write BIOs, cipher lists 
specially created for this ssl, the SSL_SESSION. Do not explicitly free these 
indirectly freed up items before or after calling SSL_free(), as trying to free 
things twice may lead to program failure.


> On June 28, 2014, 8:35 p.m., Matt Jordan wrote:
> > /branches/11/res/res_rtp_asterisk.c, lines 2266-2272
> > <https://reviewboard.asterisk.org/r/3679/diff/1/?file=61060#file61060line2266>
> >
> >     And call a shared destruction routine here

Since the underlying destruction routine would only call SSL_free I'm not sure 
there would be much value, but after making a common structure it may happen 
anyway.


- Joshua


-----------------------------------------------------------
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviewboard.asterisk.org/r/3679/#review12382
-----------------------------------------------------------


On June 26, 2014, 3:49 p.m., Joshua Colp wrote:
> 
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
> https://reviewboard.asterisk.org/r/3679/
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> 
> (Updated June 26, 2014, 3:49 p.m.)
> 
> 
> Review request for Asterisk Developers.
> 
> 
> Bugs: ASTERISK-22961 and ASTERISK-23026
>     https://issues.asterisk.org/jira/browse/ASTERISK-22961
>     https://issues.asterisk.org/jira/browse/ASTERISK-23026
> 
> 
> Repository: Asterisk
> 
> 
> Description
> -------
> 
> This change does the following:
> 
> 1. Adds SHA-256 support for DTLS-SRTP. This is done in an extensible way so 
> if we need to add other hashes it should be relatively easy to.
> 2. Adds the ability to force "AVP" for DTLS streams for greater 
> interoperability.
> 3. Sets the ICE role to controlled or controlling depending on offer/answer.
> 4. Provides the ability to verify only fingerprint, certificate, or both.
> 5. Adds DTLS negotiation to RTCP.
> 6. Changes DTLS negotiation to occur after ICE negotiation completes.
> 7. Adds handling of DTLS traffic before ICE negotiation has formally 
> completed.
> 
> 
> Diffs
> -----
> 
>   /branches/11/res/res_rtp_asterisk.c 417252 
>   /branches/11/main/rtp_engine.c 417252 
>   /branches/11/include/asterisk/rtp_engine.h 417252 
>   /branches/11/configs/sip.conf.sample 417252 
>   /branches/11/channels/sip/include/sip.h 417252 
>   /branches/11/channels/chan_sip.c 417252 
> 
> Diff: https://reviewboard.asterisk.org/r/3679/diff/
> 
> 
> Testing
> -------
> 
> Tested inbound and outbound calls against:
> 
> Chrome
> Yandex Browser
> Opera
> Maxthon
> Firefox
> 
> Note that hold/unhold only currently works against Chrome based browsers.
> 
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Joshua Colp
> 
>

-- 
_____________________________________________________________________
-- Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com --

asterisk-dev mailing list
To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit:
   http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-dev

Reply via email to