actually
if ( !is_method("ACK|CANCEL" && t_check_trans())
exit;
will be better - note that t_check_trans() returns 1 for CANCEL if there
is a corresponding INVITE transaction case when you want to process the
CANCEL and not to discard it :).
regards,
bogdan
Wolfgang Hottgenroth wrote:
Hi,
so
if (method != "ACK" && t_check_trans()) {
return;
}
should do the job?
Thanks,
Wolfgang
Bogdan-Andrei Iancu schrieb:
Hi Wolfgang,
the functionality you describe is preserved and now it is build in
t_check_trans() - if a retransmission is detected by this function,
the last reply will be retransmitted and it will break out from script.
regards,
bogdan
Wolfgang Hottgenroth wrote:
Hi,
yep, I saw that function. However, I miss the function
t_retransmit_reply too. I have the following piece of code in my script:
if (t_lookup_request()) {
t_retransmit_reply();
return;
}
This snippet appears very early in the script, before any sophisticated
stuff. Using this code I avoided the handling of retransmitted REQUESTs,
just to recognize the retransmission in the final t_relay statement,
where it would be dropped. Thereby I achieved a remarkable performance
increase, since the handling in between is indeed somewhat resource
consuming.
What can I do now to achieve the retransmission of the reply? Just use
t_relay and rely on the recognition therein?
Something like this:
if (method != "ACK" && t_check_trans()) {
t_relay();
return;
}
In this case, it is crucial, that the retransmission recognition in
t_relay works properly and definitely just a retransmission of the reply
appears and NO relaying to the destination.
Would this work?
Thanks,
Wolfgang
Bogdan-Andrei Iancu schrieb:
Hi Wolfgang,
the function was replaced by t_check_trans() - a more general
approach. See:
http://www.openser.org/docs/modules/1.2.x/tm.html#AEN459
regards,
bogdan
Wolfgang Hottgenroth wrote:
Hi,
what happens to the t_lookup_request function of the tm module in the
1.2.0 release? I was using this function in my openser script and
no it
disappears. Although the underlying t_check function still exists.
What is the reason?
Thanks,
Wolfgang
_______________________________________________
Users mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://openser.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users
_______________________________________________
Users mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://openser.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users
