Dear Daniel, There are few issues with this patch:
1. I would like the make it possible to enable/disable "disconnect notification" feature on the per-call basis. Basically, the idea is that the client code will pass the address that it wants rtpproxy to send the disconnect notification to with the "create session" request. This would allow several "disconnect-aware" clients to share one proxy. The important issue here is the security - allowing rtpproxy opening arbitrary local socket could be dangerous, my suggestion is that on startup the proxy should be supplied with the list of allowed "disconnect sockets" and only allow client requesting notification to any of those. 2. The "split TTL" code changes existing functionality, so that it should be enabled (opt in) explicitly. The reason why it's important is because the old behavior was here on purpose - basically to handle sendonly/recvonly streams properly. The new code will cause automatic disconnect of such streams. 3. I don't see any conceptual issues with "disconnect all" feature, however the implementation is incomplete as it doesn't handle "cookie", which is necessary when sending reply in the remote mode. Also, on the protocol front, it should be using reply_ok()/reply_error(), instead of rolling out custom verbose reply. 4. Programming issue: in the trunk version please add new command line options/arguments to the struct cfg, not as a new static variables to the main.c as in 0.2. Please improve the patch and submit it again for review. Thanks! P.S. Please use RTPproxy Development list <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> for the further discussion. Daniel Pocock wrote: >> Daniel Pocock wrote: >>> >>> I've been using patched version of rtpproxy with the following features: >>> >>> - the TTL is maintained for each direction independently, so if just one >>> side stops sending for max_ttl seconds, the connection can be dropped >>> >>> - whenever a connection is dropped, a notification is logged to a socket >>> (the socket is configured with the new parameter, -n ) >>> >>> Does anyone have any comments on this patch and it's suitability for the >>> main rtpproxy CVS? I'm going to post the patch and some other work on >>> this list shortly. >> Daniel, >> >> Both make sense to me. Please post them, but make sure they are for the >> CVS trunk before posting, though. There were many changes, particularly >> in the TTL tracking code. >> > > The patches were originally developed on 0.2 > > I have modified them for the CVS trunk and attached a diff. > > Another change that is included: the command x or X will cause all > sessions to be dropped. I invoke this command when my B2BUA starts, to > ensure there are no lingering sessions from a previous B2BUA that crashed. Regards, -- Maksym Sobolyev Sippy Software, Inc. Internet Telephony (VoIP) Experts T/F: +1-646-651-1110 Web: http://www.sippysoft.com _______________________________________________ Users mailing list Users@rtpproxy.org http://lists.rtpproxy.org/mailman/listinfo/users
