The patch adding text pvar in case of negative result. https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?group_id=232389&atid=1086412
-- Nick 2013/2/26 Bogdan-Andrei Iancu <[email protected]> > ** > I would suggest to spit -1 even more... or we can make the function to > populate a kind of strerror :) - to return in a pvar the description of the > failure....just exploring here :) > > Regards, > > Bogdan-Andrei Iancu > OpenSIPS Founder and Developerhttp://www.opensips-solutions.com > > > On 02/26/2013 05:16 PM, Nick Altmann wrote: > > Now we have: > > - > > *1* - the message is RFC3261 compliant and has been successfully > validated. > - > > *-1* - the message is not RFC3261 compliant. > - > > *-2* - signals a parsing error. > - > > *-3* - invalid SDP body. > - > > *-4* - invalid headers body. > - > > *-5* - invalid R-URI. > - > > *-6* - invalid R-URI domain. > - > > *-255* - undefined errors. > > "-1" can be: > - message doesn't have callid > - message doesn't have Content Length header for proto %d > - PATH header supported only for REGISTERs > - Cseq not parsed properly > - invalid body - content length %ld different then actual body %d > > Maybe increase log level for "-1" only? > But now I think I just can increase debug level before sip_msg_validate() > and lower it after. :-) > > -- > Nick > > > 2013/2/26 Bogdan-Andrei Iancu <[email protected]> > >> In this case, it means the function has to report something more than >> -1....like: -1 no MF hdr, -2 missing body, -3 missing TO, etc... >> >> Regards, >> >> Bogdan-Andrei Iancu >> OpenSIPS Founder and Developerhttp://www.opensips-solutions.com >> >> >> On 02/26/2013 03:32 PM, Nick Altmann wrote: >> >> Bogdan, >> >> I'm second time deal with problem when I receive "-1" from script and >> to understand what is not okay I should compare message with source code. >> :-) >> Of course I receive and interpret this codes, but "-1" is not fully >> informative sometimes. Especially when sdp length is not okay. :-) >> >> -- >> Nick >> >> >> 2013/2/26 Bogdan-Andrei Iancu <[email protected]> >> >>> Hi Nick, >>> >>> Such a change may induce a self-spaming effect on your logs :). I would >>> rather interpret the return code from script and let the script writer the >>> decision if he wants to log that or not...(depending on the failed check, >>> maybe if local subscriber or not, etc). >>> >>> At least these are my 2 cents on the matter :) >>> >>> Regards, >>> >>> Bogdan-Andrei Iancu >>> OpenSIPS Founder and Developerhttp://www.opensips-solutions.com >>> >>> >>> On 02/26/2013 01:01 PM, Nick Altmann wrote: >>> >>> Hello! >>> >>> What about to change DBG messages in sip_msg_validate() to ERR or >>> INFO? It will help to understand the reason of reject. Especially for -1 >>> return (the message is not RFC3261 compliant). >>> >>> -- >>> Nick >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Users mailing >>> [email protected]http://lists.opensips.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users >>> >>> >> >
_______________________________________________ Users mailing list [email protected] http://lists.opensips.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users
