[SR-Users] is t_flush_flags() really needed?
Juha Heinanen writes: > While testing xflags, i noticed that a regular flag that I set AFTER > calling t_newtrans() stays set in onreply_route even when I do not > call t_flush_flags(). I made the same test with xflags and they do require t_flush_xflags() call if an xflag is set after t_newtrans(); So the behavior is not the same with flags and xflags. This is confusing. The flags should behave the same way and I would prefer the flags way in order to avoid the flush call. I added sr-dev to this thread since it now deals also the new feature. -- Juha ___ Kamailio (SER) - Users Mailing List sr-users@lists.kamailio.org https://lists.kamailio.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sr-users
[SR-Users] is t_flush_flags() really needed?
While testing xflags, i noticed that a regular flag that I set AFTER calling t_newtrans() stays set in onreply_route even when I do not call t_flush_flags(). In a route block: if (!t_newtran()) { ERROR(Failed to create new transaction for $rm <$ru>); exit; }; if (!isflagset(19)) INFO( flag 19 is NOT set after t_newtran()); setflag(19); and in onreply_route: if (isflagset(19)) INFO(* flag 19 is set); else INFO(* flag 19 is NOT set); Syslog gets: Mar 25 11:24:41 trout /usr/bin/sip-proxy[21362]: INFO: flag 19 is NOT set after t_newtran() Mar 25 11:24:41 trout /usr/bin/sip-proxy[21433]: INFO: * flag 19 is set So what is the point of t_flush_flags()? -- Juha ___ Kamailio (SER) - Users Mailing List sr-users@lists.kamailio.org https://lists.kamailio.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sr-users