Hi Nick,
Thank you for the patch - once we are over the today release for stable
1.9.0, we will start working on the patches.
Best regards,
Bogdan-Andrei Iancu
OpenSIPS Founder and Developer
http://www.opensips-solutions.com
On 02/26/2013 08:26 PM, Nick Altmann wrote:
The patch adding text pvar in case of negative result.
https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?group_id=232389&atid=1086412
<https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?group_id=232389&atid=1086412>
--
Nick
2013/2/26 Bogdan-Andrei Iancu <[email protected]
<mailto:[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 Developer
http://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]
<mailto:[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 Developer
http://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]
<mailto:[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 Developer
http://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 list
[email protected] <mailto:[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
