On Dec 10, 2009 at 10:45, Juha Heinanen <[email protected]> wrote: > Klaus Darilion writes: > > Juha Heinanen wrote: > > > Andrei Pelinescu-Onciul writes: > > > > > > > > K's tm module can be configured to have transaction AVPs or message > AVPs: > > > > > http://kamailio.org/docs/modules/1.5.x/tm#id2530480 > > > > > > > > > > What is the behaviour of ser's tm module? I need AVPs in reply > route - > > > > > is it supported? > > > > > > > > In theory, yes by default. In practice it looks like there's a bug if > > > > several replies are processed in the same time. > > > > As a quick fix for sr_3.0 I might introduce the same mechanism as in > k. > > > > > > i didn't quite get this. in sr_3.0, i do see avps in onrely_route that > > > were set in route block before t_relay was called. is this what andrei > > > means in above by default behavior? if so that is fine with me. > > > > Yes. So sr has a different default behavior than k. (should be > > documented in migration guide) > > what is the conclusion about this?
I'll have a quick fix in the next few days (similar to k, but I'm thinking of going for read-only avps by default and a modparam to turn them r/w at the price of locking the reply route). In the long run we need a better fix. > > it is ok with me if in in sr_3.0 onreply_avp_mode is on by default > (and even on always), but i'm very worried, if it does not work when > several replies are processed simultaneously. Yes, if avps are written in the onreply_route and replies for the same transaction are processed in parallel there's the chance of corrupting the transaction avp list or even crashing. Andrei _______________________________________________ sr-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.sip-router.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sr-dev
