On Wed, 2009-09-23 at 09:03 -0400, Damian Krzeminski wrote: > The same gateway may appear many times in different tests. While the code > that authorizes the call does not (or should not) care the end result is > that you can certainly use the same gateway in many rules and expect > everything to work properly.
After talking to various people about this, the consensus seems to be that one *should* be able to use the same gateway in many rules and "it just works", but in practice, it does not. The underlying problem is that the routing aspect of the dial rules is implemented in one process but the authorization aspect is implemented in another process. Speaking as a mathematician, I'm sure we could (with sufficient care) generate an authrules.xml that takes into account multiple, overlapping dial rules for a single gateway -- in any situation, there can be only a finite number of sub-cases to be considered. But it wouldn't be that much harder to solve the problem correctly, by combining the proxy and registrar processes. That would make this problem "just go away", and fix various other difficulties as well. I think we have a JIRA for that project. Raymond, why don't you link the JIRA for this problem to the JIRA for the "unified proxy" task? Dale _______________________________________________ sipx-dev mailing list [email protected] List Archive: http://list.sipfoundry.org/archive/sipx-dev Unsubscribe: http://list.sipfoundry.org/mailman/listinfo/sipx-dev sipXecs IP PBX -- http://www.sipfoundry.org/
