@Daniel, thanks for the answer and for the change accepting!
have a nice day!
--
Sent from: http://sip-router.1086192.n5.nabble.com/Users-f3.html
___
Kamailio (SER) - Users Mailing List
sr-users@lists.kamailio.org
Hello,
On 30.10.17 09:21, Vasiliy Ganchev wrote:
> Hi there again!
>
> @Daniel, can you comment what do you think about the topic?
>
I changed to return -1. Not sure what was the reason to return 0 there,
but was not the expected behaviour. Patch pushed to master and 5.0
branches for now.
Hi there again!
@Daniel, can you comment what do you think about the topic?
Thanks in advance!
cheers!
--
Sent from: http://sip-router.1086192.n5.nabble.com/Users-f3.html
___
Kamailio (SER) - Users Mailing List
sr-users@lists.kamailio.org
Hi,
indeed, when a function returns with 0, Kamailio immediately ends the
processing of the packet. So that's why the unlock statement is never
executed.
I am wondering, why you are using locks at this point. That way, only
one REGISTER can be processed at the same time, since they all share
the
Hi, community!
I have in my Kamailio script following block (while REGISTER processing,
after auth succeed):
.
/* Save to usrloc */
lock("LOCATION_LOCK");
if (!save("location")) {
unlock("LOCATION_LOCK");
sl_reply_error();
