El Tuesday 04 March 2008 11:20:47 Bogdan-Andrei Iancu escribió: > Hi guys, > > Thanks a lot for the valuable input. In my opinion,trying to summarize > the discussion: > > what we need is not to have a mechanism to ignore the C timer, but > rather a better way to manage/control C timer. > > This means: > > 1) dropping (after all) the "noisy_ctimer" as it proves to be more or > less a hack > > 2) add new feature to manage/control C timer (like onreply route change > support, different routes for timeout and failures, etc).. > > > Is this commonly agreed?
I agree. -- Iñaki Baz Castillo [EMAIL PROTECTED] _______________________________________________ Users mailing list Users@lists.openser.org http://lists.openser.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users
