Hi Carsten,

Thanks for your responce and please excuse my late reply too. I'm still working on the changes and will make a pull request as soon as I am ready. It will be a separate module which handles the IPSec tunnel creation/tear down, so that ims_register_pcscf won't be polluted with platform specific functionality. You are right, that new module can be ifdef-ed and replaced with something *BSD specific or whatever OS someone wants to use.

Best regards,
Tsvetomir

On Fri, Oct 13, 2017 at 6:21 AM, Carsten Bock <carsten@ng-voice.com> wrote:
Hi Tsvetomir,

sorry for the late reply. I assume this mail got lost a bit in the
days of Astricon. I even asked Daniel about this mail during Astricon,
but he hadn't seen it yet. Right now, I'm officially on holiday....

Can you please provide a Pull-Request for the changes?

>From my perspective, it is likely fine to have a Linux-Only module, it
might not be the first one. If you can encapsulate your extensions
with some IFDEF's, so the functionality can be disabled on non-Linux,
then that would be fine with me.

It would be great, if Daniel or anyone else from the Management-Group
could answer or comment this one as well??

Thanks,
Carsten

2017-10-04 10:14 GMT-04:00 Tsvetomir Dimitrov <tsv.dimitrov@gmail.com>:
> Hello,
>
> I am working on a functionality which handles ipsec tunel creation for VoLTE
> registration and I'd like to contribute it to the project. However the code
> is heavily Linux specific - uses xfrm framework, so it won't compile on
> distribution with older kernels and definitely won't compile on *BSD.
>
> How problematic is this? How to handle this implementation so that it gets
> merged?
>
> Right now I can see two options:
> 1. Implement the functionality in ims_register_pcscf.
> 2. Implement separate ipsec module and handle the tunel creation/tear down
> from the configuration.
>
> The first solution is definitely the easiest one for implementation, but
> after my patch the module won't be as portable as it is now and I'm afraid
> my patch will be rejected.
>
> The second one separates the platform specific code in separate module and
> won't affect ims_register_pcscf. However I need data from ims_usrloc_pcscf,
> which is not accessible from the configuration. Also, writing separate
> module for a limited IPSEC handling seems like a overkill for me.
>
> What's your opinion?
>
> Best regards,
> Tsvetomir
>
> _______________________________________________
> Kamailio (SER) - Development Mailing List
> sr-dev@lists.kamailio.org
> https://lists.kamailio.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sr-dev
>



--
Carsten Bock
CEO (Geschäftsführer)

ng-voice GmbH
Millerntorplatz 1
20359 Hamburg / Germany

http://www.ng-voice.com
mailto:carsten@ng-voice.com

Office +49 40 5247593-40
Fax +49 40 5247593-99

Sitz der Gesellschaft: Hamburg
Registergericht: Amtsgericht Hamburg, HRB 120189
Geschäftsführer: Carsten Bock
Ust-ID: DE279344284

Hier finden Sie unsere handelsrechtlichen Pflichtangaben:
http://www.ng-voice.com/imprint/

_______________________________________________
Kamailio (SER) - Development Mailing List
sr-dev@lists.kamailio.org
https://lists.kamailio.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sr-dev