On 5/13/10 11:30 AM, Daniel-Constantin Mierla wrote:
On 5/12/10 11:33 AM, Andreas Granig wrote:
at the first sight, looking into the code, should be the same in 1.5.
Are you sure is different? Practically the registrar/usrloc were
touched
just a bit, nothing in the lookup or save functiona
On 5/12/10 11:33 AM, Andreas Granig wrote:
at the first sight, looking into the code, should be the same in 1.5.
Are you sure is different? Practically the registrar/usrloc were touched
just a bit, nothing in the lookup or save functionality.
Hmmm... You're right, I'm not sure about 1.5, sinc
at the first sight, looking into the code, should be the same in 1.5.
Are you sure is different? Practically the registrar/usrloc were touched
just a bit, nothing in the lookup or save functionality.
Hmmm... You're right, I'm not sure about 1.5, since I only used this
version for load-balancing
On 5/11/10 10:56 PM, Iñaki Baz Castillo wrote:
2010/5/11 Daniel-Constantin Mierla:
Right now, I would say that lookup should reset any existing dst_uri if
received is null.
IMHO it's the expected behaviour, if not it would be a chaos as we
should take care of manually reseting N pse
2010/5/11 Daniel-Constantin Mierla :
> Right now, I would say that lookup should reset any existing dst_uri if
> received is null.
IMHO it's the expected behaviour, if not it would be a chaos as we
should take care of manually reseting N pseudovariables (perhaps N+1
tomorrow).
--
Iñaki Baz Casti
Right now, I would say that lookup should reset any existing dst_uri if
received is null.
Sounds reasonable.
regards
klaus
___
SIP Express Router (SER) and Kamailio (OpenSER) - sr-users mailing list
sr-users@lists.sip-router.org
http://lists.sip-ro
Hello,
On 5/11/10 2:59 PM, Andreas Granig wrote:
Hi,
Some interesting behavior with kam-3.0, which I haven't experienced
with <= 1.5:
Let's say I have two subscribers A and B registered. A has a
received-value in location table, B has it set to NULL.
If I call lookup() for A, $ru is set t
Are you using newest 3.0 ? (git checkout)
I remember I once also had a problem with PVs which had stored old
values, but I can not remember naymore which PV it was.
regards
klaus
Am 11.05.2010 14:59, schrieb Andreas Granig:
Hi,
Some interesting behavior with kam-3.0, which I haven't experien
Hi,
Some interesting behavior with kam-3.0, which I haven't experienced with
<= 1.5:
Let's say I have two subscribers A and B registered. A has a
received-value in location table, B has it set to NULL.
If I call lookup() for A, $ru is set to the registered contact, and $du
is set to the re
