21 May
2010
21 May
'10
4:23 p.m.
On May 21, 2010 at 14:23, Juha Heinanen <jh(a)tutpro.com> wrote:
It would be slightly more difficult (definitely not only 1 changed
line). Basically we would need to remember if ruri is can be used for
branches or not. On new message set ruri_is_new=1 (ruri_is_new being a
new static var inside dset.c) and on clear_branches() set it to 0. Then
change t_forward_non_ack() and use ruri_is_new instead of
first_branch==0 for the first add_uac().
For failure route ruri_is_new should be set to 0.
Each time a new uri is set, ruri_is_new should also be set to 1.
Probably the same should be done if dst_uri is changed.
Andrei
Andrei Pelinescu-Onciul writes:
andrei,
i want to do that inside next_gw()/next_contacts() functions, not in the
script. could it be somehow possible to check from the branch structure
(dset.h/c) if request-uri is still unused? would
get_branch_iterator(void) and next_branch() or get_branch() work
although they seem to be very heavy means.
No, they won't work. t_relay() will clear all the branches if it
creates a transaction (even if it fails). Even if this wouldn't be the
case it would still not possible to do the ruri check with the current
code.
The only way would be either to get the transaction number of branches
(t->nr_of_outgoings) previous to calling t_relay() and compare with the
same number after that (if different you need to use append_branch(),
else set new uri), or relay on checking ser_error (this is $rc or $? in
the code).
i
don't understand, how it is possible that transaction was created, but
request uri was not marked as used. also, i don't understand how i can
ever get this to work, because i don't have no way to know if i should
rewrite request uri or append a branch.
This happens because the request uri was not really used (adding a
branch with it failed).
You could either check the return code and if
1. $? is E_BAD_ADDRESS or E_NO_SOCKET rewrite the uri
2. $? is E_SEND append a branch
3. all other cases for $? <0 exit.
or see below. As far as I understood the osips behaviour was
only for failure route.
may be, but it would be simpler still if i could set request-uri in any
block, i.e., setting of request-uri always clears possible existing
request uri and possibly existing branches. after that, more branches
can be added by append_branch() before calling t_relay(), which always
operates on request-uri and the possible branches.
Anyway there is a simple change that would allow
rewriting only the
request uri and having t_relay() add new branches. However it will work
only if append_branch() is not used in the same time (if append_branch()
is used and this is not the first t_relay() call, only the branches added by
append_branch() will be used) and will hide mistakes like calling
t_relay() twice without changing anything (e.g. t_relay(); t_relay()
will result in 2 branches with the same uri and destination, instead of
the current behaviour which is 1 branch and an error logged).
that sounds too complicated and risky. would the change that i suggest
in above be more difficult to implement?