On Wed, 2009-12-09 at 14:04 -0500, Dale Worley wrote: > On Tue, 2009-12-08 at 15:13 -0500, Scott Lawrence wrote: > > As far as I can tell from looking at the code, the only change (aside > > from any backward compatibility issues) would be to change a check for > > whether the registrations all have the same number... > > > > I'll have to think about whether or not we have to make adjustments for > > backward compatibility on this... > > If the server side of this RPC now checks that all updates have the same > number, then certainly the client side of the changed RPC will have to > do some compatibility work!
Yes, but that interface isn't used until the push (operational) phase. If the newer implementation can deduce that a peer is the older implementation either during the pull (startup) phase or at the reset that switches phases, then it can adjust its behavior... _______________________________________________ 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/
