On Fri, 2010-05-07 at 14:13 -0400, Mossman, Paul (Paul) wrote:
> Scott wrote: 
> > > Why isn't the same true of the mappingrules 
> > (transformation-only) redirector?
> > 
> > Because it's not designed that way :-)
> > 
> > > i.e. You have a conference bridge 6480, and a 6XXX->XXX 
> > > transformation-only rule.  An INVITE to 6480 will result in 
> > a Contact 
> > > for the conference bridge, but also 480?  Surely a User 480 
> > would not 
> > > also receive an INVITE?
> > 
> > Yes, both would get that call - since the conference bridge 
> > answers right away, it would probably win the resulting race.
> 
> I doubt admins expect transformation-only dial plan rules to cause
> simring with internal extensions.  Certainly not based on the UI we
> are currently presenting.
> 
> Are there any plausible use cases where this is required?

I'm not sure that I understand the question... do you mean "do we need
the current behavior of mappingrules to add contacts when there already
are some?".  Even aside from the backward-compatibility problem the
change would create, I think the answer is yes.

> If not, then should we consider changing mappingrules redirectors so
> that they too only return a Contact when no previous redirector has
> added one.

Why?  It has always worked this way... what's the problem you want to
solve?

If there's a change we should think about, it's allowing more than one
rule to match, but doing _that_ in a backwards-compatible way is a
significant challenge because you have to have a flag or some other
mechanism that says "if this rule matches then stop trying", and then
set that flag on all rules when converting from previous versions.

I think that for 4.3 we should focus mostly on creating a UI that makes
the current routing mechanisms easier to set up, understand, and debug.
Once we've got that, then it will be safe to start thinking about
changing them.

_______________________________________________
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/

Reply via email to