Olle E. Johansson writes: > > is this acceptable to everyone? feel welcome to propose a better name > > for next_contacts_skip(). > > next_contact_flow() > > #If we have no spare flow for current contact, go to next q level. > if (!next_contact_flow()) > next_contacts();
there may be more than one flow left to try because more than one ua may have registered the same aor, so better name would be next_contact_flows. -- juha _______________________________________________ sr-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.sip-router.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sr-dev
