Peter,
you're totally right that normally you don't want to use this on an
optional receive and that it can be replaced by an unconditional jump +
pause or nop.
That's why I find it so strange that in the code part I described
earlier, there is that weird special handling of the conditional branch
(test="x"), for which finally the same arguments apply. So this way, I
at least pointed out that there can be a difference in behaviour between
those two features, although users will probably see them as totally
similar.
Best regards,
MarcVD
________________________________
From: Peter Higginson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: 01 December 2006 11:24
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: [email protected]
Subject: RE: [Sipp-users] statistical (conditional) branching
Hi Marc,
I have not looked at the code yet - I will I'm sure because it seems a
useful feature.
I would have though that you would probably not want it in combination
with receive optional. The idea of the next in optional is that you go
there only when you get the optional packet - the "normal" flow is in
effect to ignore optional packets (although I think the state machine
steps) so I suppose that is a valid result.
You would be better if you wanted a statistical response to an optional
packet to jump out to a 100ms pause and put the chance in that. That way
you get two possible responses.
Peter
Peter Higginson
Newport Networks Ltd,
Direct line 01494 470694
http://www.newport-networks.com/
________________________________
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: 01 December 2006 10:00
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: [email protected]
Subject: [Sipp-users] statistical (conditional) branching
Hello all,
to have sipp behave somewhat more like a "normal" sip client being used
by a human, I added statistical branching in the code.
In more detail: wherever you can have a conditional branch on a variable
being set (test="4"), you can also branch based on a statistical
decision using the attribute "chance" (e.g. chance="0.90"). Chance can
have a value between 0 (never) and 1 (always), "test" and "chance" can
be combined, i.e. only branching when the test succeeds and the chance
is good.
With this, you can have a variable reaction in a given scenario (e.g..
answer the call or reject with busy), or run around in a loop (e.g.
registrations) and break out of it after some random number of
iterations.
About the code:
As the feature is very similar to the conditional branch, I added it on
the code wherever conditional branching was handled.
There is one exception to this, where maybe it's not quite ok: in the
receive handling code around lines 2950-2990 in call.cpp, where I
couldn't get any clue on what exactly the goal/usage of that code part
was. Maybe the author of the "test" feature could have a look at that??
Anyhow, the only possible problem the strange code part could have, is
with optional receives with a statistical branch in it where the
statistical decision would give a NO answer (everybody is warned by
this;-)
Anyhow, it should be working without problems on pause, nop, send and
non-optional receives.
<<sipp.2006-11-08.chance.diff>>
Best regards,
MarcVD
(-: from Marc VAN DIEST (BELGACOM ANS/NTA) +32 2 244 5078 ;-)
**** DISCLAIMER ****
http://www.belgacom.be/maildisclaimer
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Take Surveys. Earn Cash. Influence the Future of IT
Join SourceForge.net's Techsay panel and you'll get the chance to share your
opinions on IT & business topics through brief surveys - and earn cash
http://www.techsay.com/default.php?page=join.php&p=sourceforge&CID=DEVDEV
_______________________________________________
Sipp-users mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/sipp-users
