Hello,
we started discussing about removing MI (so called management interface) for very long time, more or less since 2008. The RPC should remain the control interface, given its better structure for commands, parameters, etc ... MI is custom protocol using a line-oriented communication via fifo or socket file with kamailio (e.g., implemented mi_fifo and mi_datagram modules). RPC is the alternative, a more standardized concept, with better structured format.
I think it's time to set a clear roadmap for doing the removal. Overall, it will be easier to maintain the code, right now being duplicated code for doing the same operation over MI or RPC, and MI shows its limitations (or complexity to deal with) for advanced needs (see the discussions about how to provide multi-line value parameters over MI).
So, I want to know if there are many relying on MI directly and they still want to keep it, what would be the expected duration they need for upgrading their tools to work with RPC interface, other relevant aspects people have in favour of mi vs rpc.
I am even willing to do the removal in time befire freezing the 5.0 branch. We will ensure a clean start of 5.x series.
The main concern from my point of view is kamctl -- but I think we can preserve the compatibility for kamctl commands and parameters (so command line execution of kamctl will be the same), but the output might be different. That's because it should be easy to updated it to communicate with jsonrpc-s module, but then it will get json-formatted results.
To summarize, two big questions to answer:
a) Are you ok to remove the MI code/commands?
b) If yes to a), are you ok to be done for v5.0?
Not providing feedback will be considered as 'yes' for both questions, so **speak up if you want MI to be kept or delay it removal**.
Cheers, Daniel
+1 - I'm all for cleaning up any technical debt and moving on with more normalized concept.
:)
Sincerely, Brandon Armstead
On Thu, Dec 1, 2016 at 6:17 AM Daniel-Constantin Mierla miconda@gmail.com wrote:
Hello,
we started discussing about removing MI (so called management interface) for very long time, more or less since 2008. The RPC should remain the control interface, given its better structure for commands, parameters, etc ... MI is custom protocol using a line-oriented communication via fifo or socket file with kamailio (e.g., implemented mi_fifo and mi_datagram modules). RPC is the alternative, a more standardized concept, with better structured format.
I think it's time to set a clear roadmap for doing the removal. Overall, it will be easier to maintain the code, right now being duplicated code for doing the same operation over MI or RPC, and MI shows its limitations (or complexity to deal with) for advanced needs (see the discussions about how to provide multi-line value parameters over MI).
So, I want to know if there are many relying on MI directly and they still want to keep it, what would be the expected duration they need for upgrading their tools to work with RPC interface, other relevant aspects people have in favour of mi vs rpc.
I am even willing to do the removal in time befire freezing the 5.0 branch. We will ensure a clean start of 5.x series.
The main concern from my point of view is kamctl -- but I think we can preserve the compatibility for kamctl commands and parameters (so command line execution of kamctl will be the same), but the output might be different. That's because it should be easy to updated it to communicate with jsonrpc-s module, but then it will get json-formatted results.
To summarize, two big questions to answer:
a) Are you ok to remove the MI code/commands?
b) If yes to a), are you ok to be done for v5.0?
Not providing feedback will be considered as 'yes' for both questions, so **speak up if you want MI to be kept or delay it removal**.
Cheers, Daniel
-- Daniel-Constantin Mierla www.twitter.com/miconda -- www.linkedin.com/in/miconda Kamailio World Conference - May 8-10, 2017 - www.kamailioworld.com
SIP Express Router (SER) and Kamailio (OpenSER) - sr-users mailing list sr-users@lists.sip-router.org http://lists.sip-router.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sr-users
Brandon Armstead writes:
+1 - I'm all for cleaning up any technical debt and moving on with more normalized concept.
I'm also in favor of getting rid on MI interface. I'm myself relying only on one MI command (pua_publish) for which an RPC command does not exist (or did not exist last time when I checked).
Some years ago I tried to implement RPC version of pua_publish, but was not able to get the call back working correctly. I also sent some messages including a piece of code to the dev list, but it was a dead end then.
Very nice if pua.publish would see a day of light again.
-- Juha
On 02/12/2016 00:24, Juha Heinanen wrote:
Brandon Armstead writes:
+1 - I'm all for cleaning up any technical debt and moving on with more normalized concept.
I'm also in favor of getting rid on MI interface. I'm myself relying only on one MI command (pua_publish) for which an RPC command does not exist (or did not exist last time when I checked).
Some years ago I tried to implement RPC version of pua_publish, but was not able to get the call back working correctly. I also sent some messages including a piece of code to the dev list, but it was a dead end then.
Very nice if pua.publish would see a day of light again.
Can you find that discussion in the archive? Open an item on bug tracker and add the link to the discussion there, so we don't forget about it.
Cheers, Daniel
On donderdag 1 december 2016 15:17:18 CET Daniel-Constantin Mierla wrote:
RPC is the alternative, a more standardized concept, with better structured format.
Before removing MI and letting everyone move to RPC, it might be wise to go over all RPC interfaces and fix them to be neat , sane and somewhat consistent. For example, there are still interfaces coding arrays as hashes with multiple identically named fields (htable.dump is one i recently ran into) . There is no language and/or JSON/XML library i know of that can properly handle those (most of them will just end up with the last entry).
On 02/12/2016 11:21, Alex Hermann wrote:
On donderdag 1 december 2016 15:17:18 CET Daniel-Constantin Mierla wrote:
RPC is the alternative, a more standardized concept, with better structured format.
Before removing MI and letting everyone move to RPC, it might be wise to go over all RPC interfaces and fix them to be neat , sane and somewhat consistent. For example, there are still interfaces coding arrays as hashes with multiple identically named fields (htable.dump is one i recently ran into) . There is no language and/or JSON/XML library i know of that can properly handle those (most of them will just end up with the last entry).
In such case the value can be constructed as an array. And I think leaving it at the free will means it won't happen -- we aimed at this since 2008 more or less. Hopefully there are only of few cases that need fixes and can be done while testing 5.0.
But for htable there should not be more than one item with the same name, so such situation should not be for htable.dump. Can you give an example that you encountered, how do you set two items with same name?
Cheers, Daniel
Hello Carrier route module doesnt have RPC command., we need to add it Cheers.
-- View this message in context: http://sip-router.1086192.n5.nabble.com/VERY-IMPORTANT-deciding-when-to-remo... Sent from the Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
Hello,
few that are missing can be probably added once we discover them. The best is to open an issue on bug tracker whenever you are aware of a mi command not implemented in rpc. Even better will be a pull request :-) -- migrating from mi to rpc should not be complex and rather easy to lean by looking at other variants with both implementations.
Cheers, Daniel
On 02/12/2016 16:18, ycaner wrote:
Hello Carrier route module doesnt have RPC command., we need to add it Cheers.
-- View this message in context: http://sip-router.1086192.n5.nabble.com/VERY-IMPORTANT-deciding-when-to-remo... Sent from the Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
SIP Express Router (SER) and Kamailio (OpenSER) - sr-users mailing list sr-users@lists.sip-router.org http://lists.sip-router.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sr-users
Hello,
looking in the code I see the carrierroute module has already rpc command for reload operations. But there are some other mi commands not implemented as rpc.
Cheers, Daniel
On 05/12/2016 11:28, Daniel-Constantin Mierla wrote:
Hello,
few that are missing can be probably added once we discover them. The best is to open an issue on bug tracker whenever you are aware of a mi command not implemented in rpc. Even better will be a pull request :-) -- migrating from mi to rpc should not be complex and rather easy to lean by looking at other variants with both implementations.
Cheers, Daniel
On 02/12/2016 16:18, ycaner wrote:
Hello Carrier route module doesnt have RPC command., we need to add it Cheers.
-- View this message in context: http://sip-router.1086192.n5.nabble.com/VERY-IMPORTANT-deciding-when-to-remo... Sent from the Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
SIP Express Router (SER) and Kamailio (OpenSER) - sr-users mailing list sr-users@lists.sip-router.org http://lists.sip-router.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sr-users
Hello, you are right. some carrier route functions are missing.important of them are dump and show methods.if i have time ,i can add them. Cheers.
6.12.2016 10:48 tarihinde Daniel-Constantin Mierla-6 [via SIP Router] yazdı:
Hello,
looking in the code I see the carrierroute module has already rpc
command for reload operations. But there are some other mi commands not
implemented as rpc.
Cheers,
Daniel
On 05/12/2016 11:28, Daniel-Constantin Mierla wrote:
> Hello,
>
> few that are missing can be probably added once we discover them. The
> best is to open an issue on bug tracker whenever you are aware of a mi
> command not implemented in rpc. Even better will be a pull request :-)
> -- migrating from mi to rpc should not be complex and rather easy to
> lean by looking at other variants with both implementations.
>
> Cheers,
> Daniel
>
>
> On 02/12/2016 16:18, ycaner wrote:
>> Hello
>> Carrier route module doesnt have RPC command., we need to add it >> Cheers.
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> View this message in context: http://sip-router.1086192.n5.nabble.com/VERY-IMPORTANT-deciding-when-to-remo... >> Sent from the Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> SIP Express Router (SER) and Kamailio (OpenSER) - sr-users mailing list
>> [hidden email]
>> http://lists.sip-router.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sr-users
-- Daniel-Constantin Mierla
www.twitter.com/miconda -- www.linkedin.com/in/miconda
Kamailio World Conference - May 8-10, 2017 - www.kamailioworld.com
_______________________________________________
SIP Express Router (SER) and Kamailio (OpenSER) - sr-users mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.sip-router.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sr-users
If you reply to this email, your message will be added to the discussion below: http://sip-router.1086192.n5.nabble.com/VERY-IMPORTANT-deciding-when-to-remo...
To unsubscribe from VERY IMPORTANT: deciding when to remove the MI code, click here . NAML
--
yasin-imza-2016.jpg (23K) http://sip-router.1086192.n5.nabble.com/attachment/153843/0/yasin-imza-2016.jpg
-- View this message in context: http://sip-router.1086192.n5.nabble.com/VERY-IMPORTANT-deciding-when-to-remo... Sent from the Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
Hello,
On 06/12/2016 08:54, ycaner wrote:
Hello,
you are right. some carrier route functions are missing.important of them are dump and show methods.if i have time ,i can add them.
that will be great if you can contribute.
Cheers, Daniel
Cheers.
6.12.2016 10:48 tarihinde Daniel-Constantin Mierla-6 [via SIP Router] yazdı:
Hello,
looking in the code I see the carrierroute module has already rpc command for reload operations. But there are some other mi commands not implemented as rpc.
Cheers, Daniel
On 05/12/2016 11:28, Daniel-Constantin Mierla wrote:
Hello,
few that are missing can be probably added once we discover them. The best is to open an issue on bug tracker whenever you are aware of a mi command not implemented in rpc. Even better will be a pull request :-) -- migrating from mi to rpc should not be complex and rather easy to lean by looking at other variants with both implementations.
Cheers, Daniel
On 02/12/2016 16:18, ycaner wrote:
Hello Carrier route module doesnt have RPC command., we need to add it Cheers.
-- View this message in context:
http://sip-router.1086192.n5.nabble.com/VERY-IMPORTANT-deciding-when-to-remo...
Sent from the Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
SIP Express Router (SER) and Kamailio (OpenSER) - sr-users mailing
list
[hidden email] </user/SendEmail.jtp?type=node&node=153841&i=0> http://lists.sip-router.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sr-users
-- Daniel-Constantin Mierla www.twitter.com/miconda -- www.linkedin.com/in/miconda Kamailio World Conference - May 8-10, 2017 - www.kamailioworld.com
SIP Express Router (SER) and Kamailio (OpenSER) - sr-users mailing list [hidden email] </user/SendEmail.jtp?type=node&node=153841&i=1> http://lists.sip-router.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sr-users
If you reply to this email, your message will be added to the discussion below: http://sip-router.1086192.n5.nabble.com/VERY-IMPORTANT-deciding-when-to-remo...
To unsubscribe from VERY IMPORTANT: deciding when to remove the MI code, click here. NAML http://sip-router.1086192.n5.nabble.com/template/NamlServlet.jtp?macro=macro_viewer&id=instant_html%21nabble%3Aemail.naml&base=nabble.naml.namespaces.BasicNamespace-nabble.view.web.template.NabbleNamespace-nabble.view.web.template.NodeNamespace&breadcrumbs=notify_subscribers%21nabble%3Aemail.naml-instant_emails%21nabble%3Aemail.naml-send_instant_email%21nabble%3Aemail.naml
View this message in context: Re: VERY IMPORTANT: deciding when to remove the MI code http://sip-router.1086192.n5.nabble.com/VERY-IMPORTANT-deciding-when-to-remove-the-MI-code-tp153719p153843.html Sent from the Users mailing list archive http://sip-router.1086192.n5.nabble.com/Users-f3.html at Nabble.com.
SIP Express Router (SER) and Kamailio (OpenSER) - sr-users mailing list sr-users@lists.sip-router.org http://lists.sip-router.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sr-users
Hello,
I just pushed a commit for cr.dump rpc command in git master, can you give it a try and report the issues? I don't use the module so I had no testing environment to play with it.
Cheers, Daniel
On 06/12/2016 08:54, ycaner wrote:
Hello,
you are right. some carrier route functions are missing.important of them are dump and show methods.if i have time ,i can add them.
Cheers.
6.12.2016 10:48 tarihinde Daniel-Constantin Mierla-6 [via SIP Router] yazdı:
Hello,
looking in the code I see the carrierroute module has already rpc command for reload operations. But there are some other mi commands not implemented as rpc.
Cheers, Daniel
On 05/12/2016 11:28, Daniel-Constantin Mierla wrote:
Hello,
few that are missing can be probably added once we discover them. The best is to open an issue on bug tracker whenever you are aware of a mi command not implemented in rpc. Even better will be a pull request :-) -- migrating from mi to rpc should not be complex and rather easy to lean by looking at other variants with both implementations.
Cheers, Daniel
On 02/12/2016 16:18, ycaner wrote:
Hello Carrier route module doesnt have RPC command., we need to add it Cheers.
-- View this message in context:
http://sip-router.1086192.n5.nabble.com/VERY-IMPORTANT-deciding-when-to-remo...
Sent from the Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
SIP Express Router (SER) and Kamailio (OpenSER) - sr-users mailing
list
[hidden email] </user/SendEmail.jtp?type=node&node=153841&i=0> http://lists.sip-router.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sr-users
-- Daniel-Constantin Mierla www.twitter.com/miconda -- www.linkedin.com/in/miconda Kamailio World Conference - May 8-10, 2017 - www.kamailioworld.com
SIP Express Router (SER) and Kamailio (OpenSER) - sr-users mailing list [hidden email] </user/SendEmail.jtp?type=node&node=153841&i=1> http://lists.sip-router.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sr-users
If you reply to this email, your message will be added to the discussion below: http://sip-router.1086192.n5.nabble.com/VERY-IMPORTANT-deciding-when-to-remo...
To unsubscribe from VERY IMPORTANT: deciding when to remove the MI code, click here. NAML http://sip-router.1086192.n5.nabble.com/template/NamlServlet.jtp?macro=macro_viewer&id=instant_html%21nabble%3Aemail.naml&base=nabble.naml.namespaces.BasicNamespace-nabble.view.web.template.NabbleNamespace-nabble.view.web.template.NodeNamespace&breadcrumbs=notify_subscribers%21nabble%3Aemail.naml-instant_emails%21nabble%3Aemail.naml-send_instant_email%21nabble%3Aemail.naml
View this message in context: Re: VERY IMPORTANT: deciding when to remove the MI code http://sip-router.1086192.n5.nabble.com/VERY-IMPORTANT-deciding-when-to-remove-the-MI-code-tp153719p153843.html Sent from the Users mailing list archive http://sip-router.1086192.n5.nabble.com/Users-f3.html at Nabble.com.
SIP Express Router (SER) and Kamailio (OpenSER) - sr-users mailing list sr-users@lists.sip-router.org http://lists.sip-router.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sr-users
Ok, thanks. Note that I just pushed another commit renaming the command from cr.dump to cr.dump_routes in order to match better the mi old command.
Cheers, Daniel
On 23/12/2016 09:35, Yasin CANER wrote:
Hello;
I will try it now. Thanks.23.12.2016 11:33 tarihinde Daniel-Constantin Mierla yazdı:
Hello,
I just pushed a commit for cr.dump rpc command in git master, can you give it a try and report the issues? I don't use the module so I had no testing environment to play with it.
Cheers, Daniel
On 06/12/2016 08:54, ycaner wrote:
Hello,
you are right. some carrier route functions are missing.important of them are dump and show methods.if i have time ,i can add them.
Cheers.
6.12.2016 10:48 tarihinde Daniel-Constantin Mierla-6 [via SIP Router] yazdı:
Hello,
looking in the code I see the carrierroute module has already rpc command for reload operations. But there are some other mi commands not implemented as rpc.
Cheers, Daniel
On 05/12/2016 11:28, Daniel-Constantin Mierla wrote:
Hello,
few that are missing can be probably added once we discover them.
The
best is to open an issue on bug tracker whenever you are aware of
a mi
command not implemented in rpc. Even better will be a pull
request :-)
-- migrating from mi to rpc should not be complex and rather easy to lean by looking at other variants with both implementations.
Cheers, Daniel
On 02/12/2016 16:18, ycaner wrote:
Hello Carrier route module doesnt have RPC command., we need to add it Cheers.
-- View this message in context:
http://sip-router.1086192.n5.nabble.com/VERY-IMPORTANT-deciding-when-to-remo...
Sent from the Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
SIP Express Router (SER) and Kamailio (OpenSER) - sr-users
mailing list
[hidden email] </user/SendEmail.jtp?type=node&node=153841&i=0> http://lists.sip-router.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sr-users
-- Daniel-Constantin Mierla www.twitter.com/miconda -- www.linkedin.com/in/miconda Kamailio World Conference - May 8-10, 2017 - www.kamailioworld.com
SIP Express Router (SER) and Kamailio (OpenSER) - sr-users mailing list [hidden email] </user/SendEmail.jtp?type=node&node=153841&i=1> http://lists.sip-router.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sr-users
If you reply to this email, your message will be added to the discussion below: http://sip-router.1086192.n5.nabble.com/VERY-IMPORTANT-deciding-when-to-remo...
To unsubscribe from VERY IMPORTANT: deciding when to remove the MI code, click here. NAML http://sip-router.1086192.n5.nabble.com/template/NamlServlet.jtp?macro=macro_viewer&id=instant_html%21nabble%3Aemail.naml&base=nabble.naml.namespaces.BasicNamespace-nabble.view.web.template.NabbleNamespace-nabble.view.web.template.NodeNamespace&breadcrumbs=notify_subscribers%21nabble%3Aemail.naml-instant_emails%21nabble%3Aemail.naml-send_instant_email%21nabble%3Aemail.naml
View this message in context: Re: VERY IMPORTANT: deciding when to remove the MI code http://sip-router.1086192.n5.nabble.com/VERY-IMPORTANT-deciding-when-to-remove-the-MI-code-tp153719p153843.html Sent from the Users mailing list archive http://sip-router.1086192.n5.nabble.com/Users-f3.html at Nabble.com.
SIP Express Router (SER) and Kamailio (OpenSER) - sr-users mailing list sr-users@lists.sip-router.org http://lists.sip-router.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sr-users
-- Daniel-Constantin Mierla www.twitter.com/miconda -- www.linkedin.com/in/miconda Kamailio World Conference - May 8-10, 2017 - www.kamailioworld.com
Btw, if you use kamctl, then all should just work with the same commands like in the past if you fetch (at this time) latest git repository and load jsonrpcs module in your config. You may need to deploy latest kamctlrc, if you do an update and you did changes in the old one.
Cheers, Daniel
On 23/12/2016 09:39, Daniel-Constantin Mierla wrote:
Ok, thanks. Note that I just pushed another commit renaming the command from cr.dump to cr.dump_routes in order to match better the mi old command.
Cheers, Daniel
On 23/12/2016 09:35, Yasin CANER wrote:
Hello;
I will try it now. Thanks.23.12.2016 11:33 tarihinde Daniel-Constantin Mierla yazdı:
Hello,
I just pushed a commit for cr.dump rpc command in git master, can you give it a try and report the issues? I don't use the module so I had no testing environment to play with it.
Cheers, Daniel
On 06/12/2016 08:54, ycaner wrote:
Hello,
you are right. some carrier route functions are missing.important of them are dump and show methods.if i have time ,i can add them.
Cheers.
6.12.2016 10:48 tarihinde Daniel-Constantin Mierla-6 [via SIP Router] yazdı:
Hello,
looking in the code I see the carrierroute module has already rpc command for reload operations. But there are some other mi commands not implemented as rpc.
Cheers, Daniel
On 05/12/2016 11:28, Daniel-Constantin Mierla wrote:
Hello,
few that are missing can be probably added once we discover
them. The
best is to open an issue on bug tracker whenever you are aware
of a mi
command not implemented in rpc. Even better will be a pull
request :-)
-- migrating from mi to rpc should not be complex and rather
easy to
lean by looking at other variants with both implementations.
Cheers, Daniel
On 02/12/2016 16:18, ycaner wrote: > Hello > Carrier route module doesnt have RPC command., we need to add it > Cheers. > > > > -- > View this message in context:
http://sip-router.1086192.n5.nabble.com/VERY-IMPORTANT-deciding-when-to-remo...
> Sent from the Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com. > > _______________________________________________ > SIP Express Router (SER) and Kamailio (OpenSER) - sr-users
mailing list
> [hidden email] </user/SendEmail.jtp?type=node&node=153841&i=0> > http://lists.sip-router.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sr-users
-- Daniel-Constantin Mierla www.twitter.com/miconda -- www.linkedin.com/in/miconda Kamailio World Conference - May 8-10, 2017 - www.kamailioworld.com
SIP Express Router (SER) and Kamailio (OpenSER) - sr-users mailing list [hidden email] </user/SendEmail.jtp?type=node&node=153841&i=1> http://lists.sip-router.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sr-users
If you reply to this email, your message will be added to the discussion below: http://sip-router.1086192.n5.nabble.com/VERY-IMPORTANT-deciding-when-to-remo...
To unsubscribe from VERY IMPORTANT: deciding when to remove the MI code, click here. NAML http://sip-router.1086192.n5.nabble.com/template/NamlServlet.jtp?macro=macro_viewer&id=instant_html%21nabble%3Aemail.naml&base=nabble.naml.namespaces.BasicNamespace-nabble.view.web.template.NabbleNamespace-nabble.view.web.template.NodeNamespace&breadcrumbs=notify_subscribers%21nabble%3Aemail.naml-instant_emails%21nabble%3Aemail.naml-send_instant_email%21nabble%3Aemail.naml
View this message in context: Re: VERY IMPORTANT: deciding when to remove the MI code http://sip-router.1086192.n5.nabble.com/VERY-IMPORTANT-deciding-when-to-remove-the-MI-code-tp153719p153843.html Sent from the Users mailing list archive http://sip-router.1086192.n5.nabble.com/Users-f3.html at Nabble.com.
SIP Express Router (SER) and Kamailio (OpenSER) - sr-users mailing list sr-users@lists.sip-router.org http://lists.sip-router.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sr-users
-- Daniel-Constantin Mierla www.twitter.com/miconda -- www.linkedin.com/in/miconda Kamailio World Conference - May 8-10, 2017 - www.kamailioworld.com
-- Daniel-Constantin Mierla www.twitter.com/miconda -- www.linkedin.com/in/miconda Kamailio World Conference - May 8-10, 2017 - www.kamailioworld.com
Hello,
can you fetch again the git master, recompile, reinstall and test again? Send here the log messages you get in syslog, because I added some log messages inside the function that fails now.
Cheers, Daniel
On 23/12/2016 12:39, Yasin CANER wrote:
Hello;
it is not working. it gives error like below.i added simpleconfiguration. reload command working fine but dump gives error. i have a look at code but couldnt find why cannot add in structs.
Thanks
13(32039) DEBUG: carrierroute [cr_fifo.c:1177]: cr_rpc_dump_routes(): start processing of data
error: 500 - Internal error - carrier structure
23.12.2016 11:46 tarihinde Daniel-Constantin Mierla yazdı:
Btw, if you use kamctl, then all should just work with the same commands like in the past if you fetch (at this time) latest git repository and load jsonrpcs module in your config. You may need to deploy latest kamctlrc, if you do an update and you did changes in the old one.
Cheers, Daniel
On 23/12/2016 09:39, Daniel-Constantin Mierla wrote:
Ok, thanks. Note that I just pushed another commit renaming the command from cr.dump to cr.dump_routes in order to match better the mi old command.
Cheers, Daniel
On 23/12/2016 09:35, Yasin CANER wrote:
Hello;
I will try it now. Thanks.23.12.2016 11:33 tarihinde Daniel-Constantin Mierla yazdı:
Hello,
I just pushed a commit for cr.dump rpc command in git master, can you give it a try and report the issues? I don't use the module so I had no testing environment to play with it.
Cheers, Daniel
On 06/12/2016 08:54, ycaner wrote:
Hello,
you are right. some carrier route functions are missing.important of them are dump and show methods.if i have time ,i can add them.
Cheers.
6.12.2016 10:48 tarihinde Daniel-Constantin Mierla-6 [via SIP Router] yazdı: > Hello, > > looking in the code I see the carrierroute module has already rpc > command for reload operations. But there are some other mi > commands not > implemented as rpc. > > Cheers, > Daniel > > > On 05/12/2016 11:28, Daniel-Constantin Mierla wrote: > > > Hello, > > > > few that are missing can be probably added once we discover > them. The > > best is to open an issue on bug tracker whenever you are aware > of a mi > > command not implemented in rpc. Even better will be a pull > request :-) > > -- migrating from mi to rpc should not be complex and rather > easy to > > lean by looking at other variants with both implementations. > > > > Cheers, > > Daniel > > > > > > On 02/12/2016 16:18, ycaner wrote: > >> Hello > >> Carrier route module doesnt have RPC command., we need to add it > >> Cheers. > >> > >> > >> > >> -- > >> View this message in context: > http://sip-router.1086192.n5.nabble.com/VERY-IMPORTANT-deciding-when-to-remo... > >> Sent from the Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com. > >> > >> _______________________________________________ > >> SIP Express Router (SER) and Kamailio (OpenSER) - sr-users > mailing list > >> [hidden email] </user/SendEmail.jtp?type=node&node=153841&i=0> > >> http://lists.sip-router.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sr-users > > -- > Daniel-Constantin Mierla > www.twitter.com/miconda -- www.linkedin.com/in/miconda > Kamailio World Conference - May 8-10, 2017 - www.kamailioworld.com > > > _______________________________________________ > SIP Express Router (SER) and Kamailio (OpenSER) - sr-users > mailing list > [hidden email] </user/SendEmail.jtp?type=node&node=153841&i=1> > http://lists.sip-router.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sr-users > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > If you reply to this email, your message will be added to the > discussion below: > http://sip-router.1086192.n5.nabble.com/VERY-IMPORTANT-deciding-when-to-remo... > > To unsubscribe from VERY IMPORTANT: deciding when to remove the > MI code, click here. > NAML > http://sip-router.1086192.n5.nabble.com/template/NamlServlet.jtp?macro=macro_viewer&id=instant_html%21nabble%3Aemail.naml&base=nabble.naml.namespaces.BasicNamespace-nabble.view.web.template.NabbleNamespace-nabble.view.web.template.NodeNamespace&breadcrumbs=notify_subscribers%21nabble%3Aemail.naml-instant_emails%21nabble%3Aemail.naml-send_instant_email%21nabble%3Aemail.naml >
View this message in context: Re: VERY IMPORTANT: deciding when to remove the MI code http://sip-router.1086192.n5.nabble.com/VERY-IMPORTANT-deciding-when-to-remove-the-MI-code-tp153719p153843.html Sent from the Users mailing list archive http://sip-router.1086192.n5.nabble.com/Users-f3.html at Nabble.com.
SIP Express Router (SER) and Kamailio (OpenSER) - sr-users mailing list sr-users@lists.sip-router.org http://lists.sip-router.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sr-users
-- Daniel-Constantin Mierla www.twitter.com/miconda -- www.linkedin.com/in/miconda Kamailio World Conference - May 8-10, 2017 - www.kamailioworld.com
-- Daniel-Constantin Mierla www.twitter.com/miconda -- www.linkedin.com/in/miconda Kamailio World Conference - May 8-10, 2017 - www.kamailioworld.com
-- Daniel-Constantin Mierla www.twitter.com/miconda -- www.linkedin.com/in/miconda Kamailio World Conference - May 8-10, 2017 - www.kamailioworld.com
Hello,
quick follow up to see if you got any chance to test with latest master.
Cheers, Daniel
On 23/12/2016 15:15, Daniel-Constantin Mierla wrote:
Hello,
can you fetch again the git master, recompile, reinstall and test again? Send here the log messages you get in syslog, because I added some log messages inside the function that fails now.
Cheers, Daniel
On 23/12/2016 12:39, Yasin CANER wrote:
Hello;
it is not working. it gives error like below.i added simpleconfiguration. reload command working fine but dump gives error. i have a look at code but couldnt find why cannot add in structs.
Thanks
13(32039) DEBUG: carrierroute [cr_fifo.c:1177]: cr_rpc_dump_routes(): start processing of data
error: 500 - Internal error - carrier structure
23.12.2016 11:46 tarihinde Daniel-Constantin Mierla yazdı:
Btw, if you use kamctl, then all should just work with the same commands like in the past if you fetch (at this time) latest git repository and load jsonrpcs module in your config. You may need to deploy latest kamctlrc, if you do an update and you did changes in the old one.
Cheers, Daniel
On 23/12/2016 09:39, Daniel-Constantin Mierla wrote:
Ok, thanks. Note that I just pushed another commit renaming the command from cr.dump to cr.dump_routes in order to match better the mi old command.
Cheers, Daniel
On 23/12/2016 09:35, Yasin CANER wrote:
Hello;
I will try it now. Thanks.23.12.2016 11:33 tarihinde Daniel-Constantin Mierla yazdı:
Hello,
I just pushed a commit for cr.dump rpc command in git master, can you give it a try and report the issues? I don't use the module so I had no testing environment to play with it.
Cheers, Daniel
On 06/12/2016 08:54, ycaner wrote: > > Hello, > > you are right. some carrier route functions are > missing.important of them are dump and show methods.if i have > time ,i can add them. > > Cheers. > > > 6.12.2016 10:48 tarihinde Daniel-Constantin Mierla-6 [via SIP > Router] yazdı: >> Hello, >> >> looking in the code I see the carrierroute module has already rpc >> command for reload operations. But there are some other mi >> commands not >> implemented as rpc. >> >> Cheers, >> Daniel >> >> >> On 05/12/2016 11:28, Daniel-Constantin Mierla wrote: >> >> > Hello, >> > >> > few that are missing can be probably added once we discover >> them. The >> > best is to open an issue on bug tracker whenever you are >> aware of a mi >> > command not implemented in rpc. Even better will be a pull >> request :-) >> > -- migrating from mi to rpc should not be complex and rather >> easy to >> > lean by looking at other variants with both implementations. >> > >> > Cheers, >> > Daniel >> > >> > >> > On 02/12/2016 16:18, ycaner wrote: >> >> Hello >> >> Carrier route module doesnt have RPC command., we need to >> add it >> >> Cheers. >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> -- >> >> View this message in context: >> http://sip-router.1086192.n5.nabble.com/VERY-IMPORTANT-deciding-when-to-remo... >> >> Sent from the Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com. >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> >> SIP Express Router (SER) and Kamailio (OpenSER) - sr-users >> mailing list >> >> [hidden email] </user/SendEmail.jtp?type=node&node=153841&i=0> >> >> http://lists.sip-router.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sr-users >> >> -- >> Daniel-Constantin Mierla >> www.twitter.com/miconda -- www.linkedin.com/in/miconda >> Kamailio World Conference - May 8-10, 2017 - www.kamailioworld.com >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> SIP Express Router (SER) and Kamailio (OpenSER) - sr-users >> mailing list >> [hidden email] </user/SendEmail.jtp?type=node&node=153841&i=1> >> http://lists.sip-router.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sr-users >> >> >> ------------------------------------------------------------------------ >> If you reply to this email, your message will be added to the >> discussion below: >> http://sip-router.1086192.n5.nabble.com/VERY-IMPORTANT-deciding-when-to-remo... >> >> To unsubscribe from VERY IMPORTANT: deciding when to remove the >> MI code, click here. >> NAML >> http://sip-router.1086192.n5.nabble.com/template/NamlServlet.jtp?macro=macro_viewer&id=instant_html%21nabble%3Aemail.naml&base=nabble.naml.namespaces.BasicNamespace-nabble.view.web.template.NabbleNamespace-nabble.view.web.template.NodeNamespace&breadcrumbs=notify_subscribers%21nabble%3Aemail.naml-instant_emails%21nabble%3Aemail.naml-send_instant_email%21nabble%3Aemail.naml >> > > -- > http://www.netgsm.com.tr > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > View this message in context: Re: VERY IMPORTANT: deciding when > to remove the MI code > http://sip-router.1086192.n5.nabble.com/VERY-IMPORTANT-deciding-when-to-remove-the-MI-code-tp153719p153843.html > Sent from the Users mailing list archive > http://sip-router.1086192.n5.nabble.com/Users-f3.html at > Nabble.com. > > > _______________________________________________ > SIP Express Router (SER) and Kamailio (OpenSER) - sr-users mailing list > sr-users@lists.sip-router.org > http://lists.sip-router.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sr-users
-- Daniel-Constantin Mierla www.twitter.com/miconda -- www.linkedin.com/in/miconda Kamailio World Conference - May 8-10, 2017 - www.kamailioworld.com
-- Daniel-Constantin Mierla www.twitter.com/miconda -- www.linkedin.com/in/miconda Kamailio World Conference - May 8-10, 2017 - www.kamailioworld.com
-- Daniel-Constantin Mierla www.twitter.com/miconda -- www.linkedin.com/in/miconda Kamailio World Conference - May 8-10, 2017 - www.kamailioworld.com
-- Daniel-Constantin Mierla www.twitter.com/miconda -- www.linkedin.com/in/miconda Kamailio World Conference - May 8-10, 2017 - www.kamailioworld.com
Hello,
thanks for testing...
Can you use latest master version, load jsonrpcs.so module and then issue the command:
kamctl rpc cr.dump_routes
Note that you may need to edit kamctlrc and set ctl engine to RPCFIFO if you have an older version of kamctlrc file installed.
Cheers, Daniel
On 04/01/2017 11:58, Yasin CANER wrote:
Hello;
lastest master branched is pulled and worked with kamailio -ddd -E. cr.reload method works fine but cr.dump_routes gives error message like "error: 500 - Internal error - carrier structure"
debug messages are here"[ master]# 13(1479) DEBUG: ctl [../../core/io_wait.h:380]: io_watch_add(): DBG: io_watch_add(0x7f05c23756c0, 8, 3, 0x1722410), fd_no=1 13(1479) DEBUG: ctl [io_listener.c:442]: handle_new_connect(): handle_stream read: new connection (1) on /var/run/kamailio//kamailio_ctl 13(1479) DEBUG: carrierroute [cr_fifo.c:1177]: cr_rpc_dump_routes(): start processing of data 13(1479) DEBUG: ctl [io_listener.c:495]: handle_stream_read(): handle_stream read: eof on /var/run/kamailio//kamailio_ctl 13(1479) DEBUG: ctl [../../core/io_wait.h:602]: io_watch_del(): DBG: io_watch_del (0x7f05c23756c0, 8, -1, 0x10) fd_no=2 called "
Hello,
thanks, got some leads with the new log messages, so I pushed another commit to see which of the fields there is causing the problem. Can you fetch again master and give it another try?
Cheers, Daniel
On 05/01/2017 09:09, Yasin CANER wrote:
Hello;
Results are here. Once i tried carrierroute config with kamailio V4.1.9 and it works. here version is kamailio 5.0.0-dev10 . it is started with "kamailio -dd -E"
[root@Test master]# kamcmd cr.reload_routes [root@Test master]# kamcmd cr.dump_routes error: 500 - Internal error - carrier structure [root@Test master]# [root@Test master]# [root@Test master]# kamctl rpc cr.dump_routes {"jsonrpc":"2.0","result":{"routes":[{"carrier":,"id":1,"domains":[{"domain":,"id":1,"data":[" NULL: 100.000 %, 'ip:5060': ON, '0', '', '', '338'"]}]}]},"id":9684}
here is log
[root@TestDispatcher master]# 10(9666) INFO: carrierroute [cr_db.c:315]: load_route_data_db(): carrier 'default' (id 1) has 1 domains 10(9666) INFO: carrierroute [cr_data.c:456]: add_route(): adding prefix , prob 1.000000 10(9666) INFO: carrierroute [cr_carrier.c:98]: add_domain_data(): adding domain 1 'mydomainip' to carrier 1 'default'10(9666) INFO: carrierroute [cr_data.c:412]: get_domain_data_or_add(): added domain 1 'mydomainip' to carrier 1 'default'10(9666) INFO: carrierroute [cr_data.c:468]: add_route(): found carrier and domain, now adding route 10(9666) INFO: carrierroute [cr_rule.c:118]: add_route_rule(): no backed up rules 10(9666) INFO: carrierroute [cr_data.c:653]: rule_fixup(): fixing tree mydomainip 10(9666) INFO: carrierroute [cr_data.c:613]: rule_fixup_recursor(): hashless rule with host ip:5060 hash, hash_index 1 _10(9666) ERROR: ctl [binrpc_run.c:1112]: rpc_struct_add(): failed to add attribute-value__ __10(9666) ERROR: carrierroute [cr_fifo.c:1192]: cr_rpc_dump_routes(): add carrier structure failure at count 0_
In addition , I tried to modify code like this and it didnt work either. it gives same error.
if(rpc->struct_add(dh, "Sd[", "carrier", "at", "id", "123", "domains", &eh)<0) { LM_ERR("add carrier structure failureat count %d\n", i); rpc->fault(ctx, 500, "Internal error - carrier structure"); goto error; }
5.01.2017 00:39 tarihinde Daniel-Constantin Mierla yazdı:
kamctl rpc cr.dump_routes
Hello,
I think I found the issue -- an improper pointer was passed to rpc struct_add. Fetch again master and try to see if this time all goes ok.
Cheers, Daniel
On 05/01/2017 09:47, Yasin CANER wrote:
Hello;
it gives error as below.Cheers.
[root@Test master]# 10(29238) ERROR: _ctl [binrpc_run.c:1112]: rpc_struct_add(): failed to add attribute-value (S)_ 10(29238) ERROR: carrierroute [cr_fifo.c:1192]: cr_rpc_dump_routes(): add carrier structure failure at count 0
5.01.2017 11:17 tarihinde Daniel-Constantin Mierla yazdı:
Hello,
thanks, got some leads with the new log messages, so I pushed another commit to see which of the fields there is causing the problem. Can you fetch again master and give it another try?
Cheers, Daniel
On 05/01/2017 09:09, Yasin CANER wrote:
Hello;
Results are here. Once i tried carrierroute config with kamailio V4.1.9 and it works. here version is kamailio 5.0.0-dev10 . it is started with "kamailio -dd -E"
[root@Test master]# kamcmd cr.reload_routes [root@Test master]# kamcmd cr.dump_routes error: 500 - Internal error - carrier structure [root@Test master]# [root@Test master]# [root@Test master]# kamctl rpc cr.dump_routes {"jsonrpc":"2.0","result":{"routes":[{"carrier":,"id":1,"domains":[{"domain":,"id":1,"data":[" NULL: 100.000 %, 'ip:5060': ON, '0', '', '', '338'"]}]}]},"id":9684}
here is log
[root@TestDispatcher master]# 10(9666) INFO: carrierroute [cr_db.c:315]: load_route_data_db(): carrier 'default' (id 1) has 1 domains 10(9666) INFO: carrierroute [cr_data.c:456]: add_route(): adding prefix , prob 1.000000 10(9666) INFO: carrierroute [cr_carrier.c:98]: add_domain_data(): adding domain 1 'mydomainip' to carrier 1 'default'10(9666) INFO: carrierroute [cr_data.c:412]: get_domain_data_or_add(): added domain 1 'mydomainip' to carrier 1 'default'10(9666) INFO: carrierroute [cr_data.c:468]: add_route(): found carrier and domain, now adding route 10(9666) INFO: carrierroute [cr_rule.c:118]: add_route_rule(): no backed up rules 10(9666) INFO: carrierroute [cr_data.c:653]: rule_fixup(): fixing tree mydomainip 10(9666) INFO: carrierroute [cr_data.c:613]: rule_fixup_recursor(): hashless rule with host ip:5060 hash, hash_index 1 _10(9666) ERROR: ctl [binrpc_run.c:1112]: rpc_struct_add(): failed to add attribute-value__ __10(9666) ERROR: carrierroute [cr_fifo.c:1192]: cr_rpc_dump_routes(): add carrier structure failure at count 0_
In addition , I tried to modify code like this and it didnt work either. it gives same error.
if(rpc->struct_add(dh, "Sd[", "carrier", "at", "id", "123", "domains", &eh)<0) { LM_ERR("add carrier structurefailure at count %d\n", i); rpc->fault(ctx, 500, "Internal error
- carrier structure"); goto error; }
5.01.2017 00:39 tarihinde Daniel-Constantin Mierla yazdı:
kamctl rpc cr.dump_routes
-- Daniel-Constantin Mierla www.twitter.com/miconda -- www.linkedin.com/in/miconda Kamailio World Conference - May 8-10, 2017 - www.kamailioworld.com
On 06/01/2017 09:15, Yasin CANER wrote:
Hello;
it is working but some braces are missing.
Providing more details would help to understand what you are meaning and where you think the issue is -- just a dry note is not helpful.
Daniel
Thanks for support. Have a nice day.
[root@TestDispatcher ~]# kamcmd cr.reload_routes [root@TestDispatcher ~]# kamcmd cr.dump_routes { routes: { { carrier: default id: 1 domains: { { domain: 185.88.7.201 id: 1 data: { 3: 100.000 %, '192.168.4.180:5060': ON, '0', '2', '1', '338' } data: { } } domains: { } } routes: { }
[root@TestDispatcher ~]# kamctl rpc cr.dump_routes {"jsonrpc":"2.0","result":{"routes":[{"carrier":"default","id":1,"domains":[{"domain":"myip","id":1,"data":[" 3: 100.000 %, '192.168.4.180:5060': ON, '0', '2', '1', '338'"]}]}]},"id":19726} [root@TestDispatcher ~]# kamcmd cr.dump_routes { routes: { { carrier: default id: 1 domains: { { domain: 185.88.7.201 id: 1 data: { 3: 100.000 %, '192.168.4.180:5060': ON, '0', '2', '1', '338' } data: { } } domains: { } } routes: { }
6.01.2017 10:56 tarihinde Daniel-Constantin Mierla yazdı:
Hello,
I think I found the issue -- an improper pointer was passed to rpc struct_add. Fetch again master and try to see if this time all goes ok.
Cheers, Daniel
On 05/01/2017 09:47, Yasin CANER wrote:
Hello;
it gives error as below.Cheers.
[root@Test master]# 10(29238) ERROR: _ctl [binrpc_run.c:1112]: rpc_struct_add(): failed to add attribute-value (S)_ 10(29238) ERROR: carrierroute [cr_fifo.c:1192]: cr_rpc_dump_routes(): add carrier structure failure at count 0
5.01.2017 11:17 tarihinde Daniel-Constantin Mierla yazdı:
Hello,
thanks, got some leads with the new log messages, so I pushed another commit to see which of the fields there is causing the problem. Can you fetch again master and give it another try?
Cheers, Daniel
On 05/01/2017 09:09, Yasin CANER wrote:
Hello;
Results are here. Once i tried carrierroute config with kamailio V4.1.9 and it works. here version is kamailio 5.0.0-dev10 . it is started with "kamailio -dd -E"
[root@Test master]# kamcmd cr.reload_routes [root@Test master]# kamcmd cr.dump_routes error: 500 - Internal error - carrier structure [root@Test master]# [root@Test master]# [root@Test master]# kamctl rpc cr.dump_routes {"jsonrpc":"2.0","result":{"routes":[{"carrier":,"id":1,"domains":[{"domain":,"id":1,"data":[" NULL: 100.000 %, 'ip:5060': ON, '0', '', '', '338'"]}]}]},"id":9684}
here is log
[root@TestDispatcher master]# 10(9666) INFO: carrierroute [cr_db.c:315]: load_route_data_db(): carrier 'default' (id 1) has 1 domains 10(9666) INFO: carrierroute [cr_data.c:456]: add_route(): adding prefix , prob 1.000000 10(9666) INFO: carrierroute [cr_carrier.c:98]: add_domain_data(): adding domain 1 'mydomainip' to carrier 1 'default'10(9666) INFO: carrierroute [cr_data.c:412]: get_domain_data_or_add(): added domain 1 'mydomainip' to carrier 1 'default'10(9666) INFO: carrierroute [cr_data.c:468]: add_route(): found carrier and domain, now adding route 10(9666) INFO: carrierroute [cr_rule.c:118]: add_route_rule(): no backed up rules 10(9666) INFO: carrierroute [cr_data.c:653]: rule_fixup(): fixing tree mydomainip 10(9666) INFO: carrierroute [cr_data.c:613]: rule_fixup_recursor(): hashless rule with host ip:5060 hash, hash_index 1 _10(9666) ERROR: ctl [binrpc_run.c:1112]: rpc_struct_add(): failed to add attribute-value__ __10(9666) ERROR: carrierroute [cr_fifo.c:1192]: cr_rpc_dump_routes(): add carrier structure failure at count 0_
In addition , I tried to modify code like this and it didnt work either. it gives same error.
if(rpc->struct_add(dh, "Sd[", "carrier", "at", "id", "123", "domains", &eh)<0) { LM_ERR("add carrier structurefailure at count %d\n", i); rpc->fault(ctx, 500, "Internal error - carrier structure"); goto error; }
5.01.2017 00:39 tarihinde Daniel-Constantin Mierla yazdı:
kamctl rpc cr.dump_routes
-- Daniel-Constantin Mierla www.twitter.com/miconda -- www.linkedin.com/in/miconda Kamailio World Conference - May 8-10, 2017 - www.kamailioworld.com
-- Daniel-Constantin Mierla www.twitter.com/miconda -- www.linkedin.com/in/miconda Kamailio World Conference - May 8-10, 2017 - www.kamailioworld.com
Hello,
comparing the list of rpc vs mi commands, also taking in consideration the interest and expressed feedback from the community, there is no reason to keep MI code longer. Also, during the last days it was signaled that mi_xmlrpc code will need an upgrade for next versions of compilers and xmlrpc-c library, so it's better to get rid of it as soon as possible to avoid work for something to be removed soon.
It should not be any complex work to add the very few missing rpc commands from the mi alternative, so whoever is using a mi command that is not yet available as rpc, should open an issue on bug tracker.
Converting the code from mi to rpc is not complex and everyone is encourage to try converting what they use from mi and it is not a rpc. I can help troubleshooting, provide guidelines, but I have no time to setup test environments for modules that I don use and I don't need those mi/rpc commands.
There is documentation about the RPC API:
- http://www.kamailio.org/docs/docbooks/5.0.x/rpc_api/rpc_api.html
But looking at other modules that have both mi and rpc commands can be a way to learn quickly how to do it.
In several days I plan to start removing MI code, first in the modules that have the rpc commands.
Cheers, Daniel
On 01/12/2016 15:17, Daniel-Constantin Mierla wrote:
Hello,
we started discussing about removing MI (so called management interface) for very long time, more or less since 2008. The RPC should remain the control interface, given its better structure for commands, parameters, etc ... MI is custom protocol using a line-oriented communication via fifo or socket file with kamailio (e.g., implemented mi_fifo and mi_datagram modules). RPC is the alternative, a more standardized concept, with better structured format.
I think it's time to set a clear roadmap for doing the removal. Overall, it will be easier to maintain the code, right now being duplicated code for doing the same operation over MI or RPC, and MI shows its limitations (or complexity to deal with) for advanced needs (see the discussions about how to provide multi-line value parameters over MI).
So, I want to know if there are many relying on MI directly and they still want to keep it, what would be the expected duration they need for upgrading their tools to work with RPC interface, other relevant aspects people have in favour of mi vs rpc.
I am even willing to do the removal in time befire freezing the 5.0 branch. We will ensure a clean start of 5.x series.
The main concern from my point of view is kamctl -- but I think we can preserve the compatibility for kamctl commands and parameters (so command line execution of kamctl will be the same), but the output might be different. That's because it should be easy to updated it to communicate with jsonrpc-s module, but then it will get json-formatted results.
To summarize, two big questions to answer:
a) Are you ok to remove the MI code/commands?
b) If yes to a), are you ok to be done for v5.0?
Not providing feedback will be considered as 'yes' for both questions, so **speak up if you want MI to be kept or delay it removal**.
Cheers, Daniel
-
Alex Hermann -
Brandon Armstead -
Daniel-Constantin Mierla -
Juha Heinanen -
Yasin CANER -
ycaner