Re: [sr-dev] mohqueue docs and suggestions

All, These are good comments and very helpful. In response, … The naming decision came up early in the design process and I concluded that queue is too generic. I thought of “callqueue” but decided against it since there are many ways to put calls into queues and I didn’t want to conflict with future modules which might have their own “call queues”. I used “mohqueue” because it is concise and hopefully makes the function more apparent. I could call it “MOHqueue” if that makes the “MOH” part stand out more. Using the payload number was not my choice but is the way Sippy RTPproxy works. Like others, ( http://lists.sip-router.org/pipermail/sr-users/2011-July/069391.html) I found this out by going directly into the source code. If I am wrong in this conclusion, please help me get it right. Being able to choose a specific call out of queue is very flexible, but under what circumstances would this feature be useful? xavp is a useful extension and something to consider for the future. I was in a hurry to meet deadlines so I chose what worked best in the current environment. I will adjust the comment about request routes. I appreciate the help with documentation since it is just as important as the code. Thanks, Bob _______________________________________________ sr-dev mailing list sr-dev(a)lists.sip-router.org http://lists.sip-router.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sr-dev