12 Aug
2019
12 Aug
'19
11:13 p.m.
Hello,
I'm playing around with the unregister() function from the registrar module:
https://www.kamailio.org/docs/modules/devel/modules/registrar.html#registra…
Docs say that that it can be used in REQUEST_ROUTE or FAILURE_ROUTE.
I needed it in REPLY_ROUTE, and before reading the docs I tried it and got
this error:
Aug 12 15:52:44 csbc01 kamailio: CRITICAL: <core> [core/cfg.y:3526]:
yyerror_at(): parse error in config file
/etc/kamailio/csbc/reply_routes.cfg, line 27, column 71: Command cannot be
used in the block#012
Aug 12 15:52:44 csbc01 kamailio[12737]: ERROR: bad config file (1 errors)
But, I have this working on another setup, I compared, and my difference is
that I'm running unregister() inside a route, and calling that route from
reply_route, and that works (and by works, I mean it also does what it is
supposed to do, which is unregister the AoR).
So this doesn't work:
...
onreply_route[MANAGE_REG_REPLY] {
if(status=~"2[0-9][0-9]") {
if(($sel(contact.expires)==0) || ($hdr(Expires)==0)){
if (unregister("location",
"$sht(sipserver=>$fU::contact)")) {
xlog("L_NOTICE", "[usrloc] removed user location\n");
}
route(DEL_SIPSERVER);
}
...
But this works:
...
onreply_route[MANAGE_REG_REPLY] {
if(status=~"2[0-9][0-9]") {
if(($sel(contact.expires)==0) || ($hdr(Expires)==0)){
route(UNREG_CUSTOMER);
route(DEL_SIPSERVER);
}
...
...
route[UNREG_CUSTOMER] {
if (unregister("location",
"$sht(sipserver=>$fU::contact)")) {
xlog("L_NOTICE", "[usrloc] removed user location\n");
}
}
...
So I'm in no-mans-land right now, docs say it's not allowed in REPLY_ROUTE,
and if I try it it will fail, but if I try it inside a route, it woks
(hack?).
What is the correct approach here? Should unregister() be valid in
reply_route (like other similar functions, for example: save()) and
therefor docs should be updated and the error in the logs should also be
updated, or if it's really not supported, shouldn't Kamailio not let me use
it anywhere that a ends up being called from reply_route?
I hope I have explained myself correctly. As always, please let me know if
this should be a GH issue instead and I'll happily create it.
Thanks,
Joel.
13 Aug
13 Aug
7:28 a.m.
Forgot to add:
root@csbc01:~# kamailio -V
version: kamailio 5.3.0-dev7 (x86_64/linux)
flags: STATS: Off, USE_TCP, USE_TLS, USE_SCTP, TLS_HOOKS, USE_RAW_SOCKS,
DISABLE_NAGLE, USE_MCAST, DNS_IP_HACK, SHM_MMAP, PKG_MALLOC, Q_MALLOC,
F_MALLOC, TLSF_MALLOC, DBG_SR_MEMORY, USE_FUTEX, FAST_LOCK-ADAPTIVE_WAIT,
USE_DNS_CACHE, USE_DNS_FAILOVER, USE_NAPTR, USE_DST_BLACKLIST,
HAVE_RESOLV_RES
ADAPTIVE_WAIT_LOOPS 1024, MAX_RECV_BUFFER_SIZE 262144, MAX_URI_SIZE 1024,
BUF_SIZE 65535, DEFAULT PKG_SIZE 8MB
poll method support: poll, epoll_lt, epoll_et, sigio_rt, select.
id: unknown
compiled with gcc 8.3.0
root@csbc01:~#
On Mon, Aug 12, 2019 at 2:13 PM Joel Serrano <joel(a)textplus.com> wrote:
Hello,
I'm playing around with the unregister() function from the registrar
module:
https://www.kamailio.org/docs/modules/devel/modules/registrar.html#registra…
Docs say that that it can be used in REQUEST_ROUTE or FAILURE_ROUTE.
I needed it in REPLY_ROUTE, and before reading the docs I tried it and got
this error:
Aug 12 15:52:44 csbc01 kamailio: CRITICAL: <core> [core/cfg.y:3526]:
yyerror_at(): parse error in config file
/etc/kamailio/csbc/reply_routes.cfg, line 27, column 71: Command cannot be
used in the block#012
Aug 12 15:52:44 csbc01 kamailio[12737]: ERROR: bad config file (1 errors)
But, I have this working on another setup, I compared, and my difference
is that I'm running unregister() inside a route, and calling that route
from reply_route, and that works (and by works, I mean it also does what it
is supposed to do, which is unregister the AoR).
So this doesn't work:
...
onreply_route[MANAGE_REG_REPLY] {
if(status=~"2[0-9][0-9]") {
if(($sel(contact.expires)==0) || ($hdr(Expires)==0)){
if (unregister("location",
"$sht(sipserver=>$fU::contact)")) {
xlog("L_NOTICE", "[usrloc] removed user
location\n");
}
route(DEL_SIPSERVER);
}
...
But this works:
...
onreply_route[MANAGE_REG_REPLY] {
if(status=~"2[0-9][0-9]") {
if(($sel(contact.expires)==0) || ($hdr(Expires)==0)){
route(UNREG_CUSTOMER);
route(DEL_SIPSERVER);
}
...
...
route[UNREG_CUSTOMER] {
if (unregister("location",
"$sht(sipserver=>$fU::contact)")) {
xlog("L_NOTICE", "[usrloc] removed user
location\n");
}
}
...
So I'm in no-mans-land right now, docs say it's not allowed in
REPLY_ROUTE, and if I try it it will fail, but if I try it inside a route,
it woks (hack?).
What is the correct approach here? Should unregister() be valid in
reply_route (like other similar functions, for example: save()) and
therefor docs should be updated and the error in the logs should also be
updated, or if it's really not supported, shouldn't Kamailio not let me use
it anywhere that a ends up being called from reply_route?
I hope I have explained myself correctly. As always, please let me know if
this should be a GH issue instead and I'll happily create it.
Thanks,
Joel.
9:36 a.m.
Hello,
that is a "known hack" to go around the route block type restrictions
for functions.
The purpose of the restrictions is to limit the usage in the blocks
where the developer intended to allow the function to be used, like
she/he tested for those route blocks or thought it is enough there and
didn't analyze the effects when using in other route block types.
However, many functions are just safe to use in other route block types
than those imposed by the developer.
Probably the unregister() is safe in onreply block, because it doesn't
need to generate a reply or use information from request URI.
Cheers,
Daniel
On 13.08.19 07:28, Joel Serrano wrote:
Forgot to add:
root@csbc01:~# kamailio -V
version: kamailio 5.3.0-dev7 (x86_64/linux)
flags: STATS: Off, USE_TCP, USE_TLS, USE_SCTP, TLS_HOOKS,
USE_RAW_SOCKS, DISABLE_NAGLE, USE_MCAST, DNS_IP_HACK, SHM_MMAP,
PKG_MALLOC, Q_MALLOC, F_MALLOC, TLSF_MALLOC, DBG_SR_MEMORY, USE_FUTEX,
FAST_LOCK-ADAPTIVE_WAIT, USE_DNS_CACHE, USE_DNS_FAILOVER, USE_NAPTR,
USE_DST_BLACKLIST, HAVE_RESOLV_RES
ADAPTIVE_WAIT_LOOPS 1024, MAX_RECV_BUFFER_SIZE 262144, MAX_URI_SIZE
1024, BUF_SIZE 65535, DEFAULT PKG_SIZE 8MB
poll method support: poll, epoll_lt, epoll_et, sigio_rt, select.
id: unknown
compiled with gcc 8.3.0
root@csbc01:~#
On Mon, Aug 12, 2019 at 2:13 PM Joel Serrano <joel(a)textplus.com
<mailto:joel@textplus.com>> wrote:
Hello,
I'm playing around with the unregister() function from the
registrar module:
https://www.kamailio.org/docs/modules/devel/modules/registrar.html#registra…
Docs say that that it can be used in REQUEST_ROUTE or FAILURE_ROUTE.
I needed it in REPLY_ROUTE, and before reading the docs I tried it
and got this error:
Aug 12 15:52:44 csbc01 kamailio: CRITICAL: <core>
[core/cfg.y:3526]: yyerror_at(): parse error in config file
/etc/kamailio/csbc/reply_routes.cfg, line 27, column 71: Command
cannot be used in the block#012
Aug 12 15:52:44 csbc01 kamailio[12737]: ERROR: bad config file (1
errors)
But, I have this working on another setup, I compared, and my
difference is that I'm running unregister() inside a route, and
calling that route from reply_route, and that works (and by works,
I mean it also does what it is supposed to do, which is unregister
the AoR).
So this doesn't work:
...
onreply_route[MANAGE_REG_REPLY] {
if(status=~"2[0-9][0-9]") {
if(($sel(contact.expires)==0) || ($hdr(Expires)==0)){
if (unregister("location",
"$sht(sipserver=>$fU::contact)")) {
xlog("L_NOTICE", "[usrloc] removed user
location\n");
}
route(DEL_SIPSERVER);
}
...
But this works:
...
onreply_route[MANAGE_REG_REPLY] {
if(status=~"2[0-9][0-9]") {
if(($sel(contact.expires)==0) || ($hdr(Expires)==0)){
route(UNREG_CUSTOMER);
route(DEL_SIPSERVER);
}
...
...
route[UNREG_CUSTOMER] {
if (unregister("location",
"$sht(sipserver=>$fU::contact)")) {
xlog("L_NOTICE", "[usrloc] removed user
location\n");
}
}
...
So I'm in no-mans-land right now, docs say it's not allowed in
REPLY_ROUTE, and if I try it it will fail, but if I try it inside
a route, it woks (hack?).
What is the correct approach here? Should unregister() be valid in
reply_route (like other similar functions, for example: save())
and therefor docs should be updated and the error in the logs
should also be updated, or if it's really not supported, shouldn't
Kamailio not let me use it anywhere that a ends up being called
from reply_route?
I hope I have explained myself correctly. As always, please let me
know if this should be a GH issue instead and I'll happily create it.
Thanks,
Joel.
_______________________________________________
Kamailio (SER) - Users Mailing List
sr-users(a)lists.kamailio.org
https://lists.kamailio.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sr-users
--
Daniel-Constantin Mierla -- www.asipto.com
www.twitter.com/miconda -- www.linkedin.com/in/miconda
9:38 a.m.
Great!!! This is good to know!!
Thank you Daniel!
Joel.
On Tue, Aug 13, 2019 at 12:36 AM Daniel-Constantin Mierla <miconda(a)gmail.com>
wrote:
Hello,
that is a "known hack" to go around the route block type restrictions for
functions.
The purpose of the restrictions is to limit the usage in the blocks where
the developer intended to allow the function to be used, like she/he tested
for those route blocks or thought it is enough there and didn't analyze the
effects when using in other route block types.
However, many functions are just safe to use in other route block types
than those imposed by the developer.
Probably the unregister() is safe in onreply block, because it doesn't
need to generate a reply or use information from request URI.
Cheers,
Daniel
On 13.08.19 07:28, Joel Serrano wrote:
Forgot to add:
root@csbc01:~# kamailio -V
version: kamailio 5.3.0-dev7 (x86_64/linux)
flags: STATS: Off, USE_TCP, USE_TLS, USE_SCTP, TLS_HOOKS, USE_RAW_SOCKS,
DISABLE_NAGLE, USE_MCAST, DNS_IP_HACK, SHM_MMAP, PKG_MALLOC, Q_MALLOC,
F_MALLOC, TLSF_MALLOC, DBG_SR_MEMORY, USE_FUTEX, FAST_LOCK-ADAPTIVE_WAIT,
USE_DNS_CACHE, USE_DNS_FAILOVER, USE_NAPTR, USE_DST_BLACKLIST,
HAVE_RESOLV_RES
ADAPTIVE_WAIT_LOOPS 1024, MAX_RECV_BUFFER_SIZE 262144, MAX_URI_SIZE 1024,
BUF_SIZE 65535, DEFAULT PKG_SIZE 8MB
poll method support: poll, epoll_lt, epoll_et, sigio_rt, select.
id: unknown
compiled with gcc 8.3.0
root@csbc01:~#
On Mon, Aug 12, 2019 at 2:13 PM Joel Serrano <joel(a)textplus.com> wrote:
Hello,
I'm playing around with the unregister() function from the registrar
module:
https://www.kamailio.org/docs/modules/devel/modules/registrar.html#registra…
Docs say that that it can be used in REQUEST_ROUTE or FAILURE_ROUTE.
I needed it in REPLY_ROUTE, and before reading the docs I tried it and
got this error:
Aug 12 15:52:44 csbc01 kamailio: CRITICAL: <core> [core/cfg.y:3526]:
yyerror_at(): parse error in config file
/etc/kamailio/csbc/reply_routes.cfg, line 27, column 71: Command cannot be
used in the block#012
Aug 12 15:52:44 csbc01 kamailio[12737]: ERROR: bad config file (1 errors)
But, I have this working on another setup, I compared, and my difference
is that I'm running unregister() inside a route, and calling that route
from reply_route, and that works (and by works, I mean it also does what it
is supposed to do, which is unregister the AoR).
So this doesn't work:
...
onreply_route[MANAGE_REG_REPLY] {
if(status=~"2[0-9][0-9]") {
if(($sel(contact.expires)==0) || ($hdr(Expires)==0)){
if (unregister("location",
"$sht(sipserver=>$fU::contact)")) {
xlog("L_NOTICE", "[usrloc] removed user
location\n");
}
route(DEL_SIPSERVER);
}
...
But this works:
...
onreply_route[MANAGE_REG_REPLY] {
if(status=~"2[0-9][0-9]") {
if(($sel(contact.expires)==0) || ($hdr(Expires)==0)){
route(UNREG_CUSTOMER);
route(DEL_SIPSERVER);
}
...
...
route[UNREG_CUSTOMER] {
if (unregister("location",
"$sht(sipserver=>$fU::contact)")) {
xlog("L_NOTICE", "[usrloc] removed user
location\n");
}
}
...
So I'm in no-mans-land right now, docs say it's not allowed in
REPLY_ROUTE, and if I try it it will fail, but if I try it inside a route,
it woks (hack?).
What is the correct approach here? Should unregister() be valid in
reply_route (like other similar functions, for example: save()) and
therefor docs should be updated and the error in the logs should also be
updated, or if it's really not supported, shouldn't Kamailio not let me use
it anywhere that a ends up being called from reply_route?
I hope I have explained myself correctly. As always, please let me know
if this should be a GH issue instead and I'll happily create it.
Thanks,
Joel.
_______________________________________________
Kamailio (SER) - Users Mailing
Listsr-users@lists.kamailio.orghttps://lists.kamailio.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sr-users
--
Daniel-Constantin Mierla -- www.asipto.comwww.twitter.com/miconda --
www.linkedin.com/in/miconda
10:23 a.m.
I just updated the code to allow unregister() in all route block types.
Cheers,
Daniel
On 13.08.19 09:38, Joel Serrano wrote:
Great!!! This is good to know!!
Thank you Daniel!
Joel.
On Tue, Aug 13, 2019 at 12:36 AM Daniel-Constantin Mierla
<miconda(a)gmail.com <mailto:miconda@gmail.com>> wrote:
Hello,
that is a "known hack" to go around the route block type
restrictions for functions.
The purpose of the restrictions is to limit the usage in the
blocks where the developer intended to allow the function to be
used, like she/he tested for those route blocks or thought it is
enough there and didn't analyze the effects when using in other
route block types.
However, many functions are just safe to use in other route block
types than those imposed by the developer.
Probably the unregister() is safe in onreply block, because it
doesn't need to generate a reply or use information from request URI.
Cheers,
Daniel
On 13.08.19 07:28, Joel Serrano wrote:
--
Daniel-Constantin Mierla -- www.asipto.com
www.twitter.com/miconda -- www.linkedin.com/in/miconda
Forgot to add:
root@csbc01:~# kamailio -V
version: kamailio 5.3.0-dev7 (x86_64/linux)
flags: STATS: Off, USE_TCP, USE_TLS, USE_SCTP, TLS_HOOKS,
USE_RAW_SOCKS, DISABLE_NAGLE, USE_MCAST, DNS_IP_HACK, SHM_MMAP,
PKG_MALLOC, Q_MALLOC, F_MALLOC, TLSF_MALLOC, DBG_SR_MEMORY,
USE_FUTEX, FAST_LOCK-ADAPTIVE_WAIT, USE_DNS_CACHE,
USE_DNS_FAILOVER, USE_NAPTR, USE_DST_BLACKLIST, HAVE_RESOLV_RES
ADAPTIVE_WAIT_LOOPS 1024, MAX_RECV_BUFFER_SIZE 262144,
MAX_URI_SIZE 1024, BUF_SIZE 65535, DEFAULT PKG_SIZE 8MB
poll method support: poll, epoll_lt, epoll_et, sigio_rt, select.
id: unknown
compiled with gcc 8.3.0
root@csbc01:~#
On Mon, Aug 12, 2019 at 2:13 PM Joel Serrano <joel(a)textplus.com
<mailto:joel@textplus.com>> wrote:
Hello,
I'm playing around with the unregister() function from the
registrar module:
https://www.kamailio.org/docs/modules/devel/modules/registrar.html#registra…
Docs say that that it can be used in REQUEST_ROUTE or
FAILURE_ROUTE.
I needed it in REPLY_ROUTE, and before reading the docs I
tried it and got this error:
Aug 12 15:52:44 csbc01 kamailio: CRITICAL: <core>
[core/cfg.y:3526]: yyerror_at(): parse error in config file
/etc/kamailio/csbc/reply_routes.cfg, line 27, column 71:
Command cannot be used in the block#012
Aug 12 15:52:44 csbc01 kamailio[12737]: ERROR: bad config
file (1 errors)
But, I have this working on another setup, I compared, and my
difference is that I'm running unregister() inside a route,
and calling that route from reply_route, and that works (and
by works, I mean it also does what it is supposed to do,
which is unregister the AoR).
So this doesn't work:
...
onreply_route[MANAGE_REG_REPLY] {
if(status=~"2[0-9][0-9]") {
if(($sel(contact.expires)==0) || ($hdr(Expires)==0)){
if (unregister("location",
"$sht(sipserver=>$fU::contact)")) {
xlog("L_NOTICE", "[usrloc] removed user
location\n");
}
route(DEL_SIPSERVER);
}
...
But this works:
...
onreply_route[MANAGE_REG_REPLY] {
if(status=~"2[0-9][0-9]") {
if(($sel(contact.expires)==0) || ($hdr(Expires)==0)){
route(UNREG_CUSTOMER);
route(DEL_SIPSERVER);
}
...
...
route[UNREG_CUSTOMER] {
if (unregister("location",
"$sht(sipserver=>$fU::contact)")) {
xlog("L_NOTICE", "[usrloc] removed user
location\n");
}
}
...
So I'm in no-mans-land right now, docs say it's not allowed
in REPLY_ROUTE, and if I try it it will fail, but if I try it
inside a route, it woks (hack?).
What is the correct approach here? Should unregister() be
valid in reply_route (like other similar functions, for
example: save()) and therefor docs should be updated and the
error in the logs should also be updated, or if it's really
not supported, shouldn't Kamailio not let me use it anywhere
that a ends up being called from reply_route?
I hope I have explained myself correctly. As always, please
let me know if this should be a GH issue instead and I'll
happily create it.
Thanks,
Joel.
_______________________________________________
Kamailio (SER) - Users Mailing List
sr-users(a)lists.kamailio.org <mailto:sr-users@lists.kamailio.org>
https://lists.kamailio.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sr-users
--
Daniel-Constantin Mierla -- www.asipto.com <http://www.asipto.com>
www.twitter.com/miconda <http://www.twitter.com/miconda> --
www.linkedin.com/in/miconda <http://www.linkedin.com/in/miconda>
3:41 p.m.
It is a bit counterintuitive, though. Like Joel, I would have thought such restrictions
ultimately should ultimately be based on the type of the toplevel action.
Then again, I make use of this a lot from failure_route, calling the same route blocks
over and over for route-advancing, some of them containing function calls which are not
strictly possible in failure_route. The only thing one really has to be careful of in that
scenario is transaction state; can’t send stateless replies out of failure_route, so
accordingly cannot send them from a descendant route either. That’s an excellent use-case
for send_reply(), which does the right thing (in effect, sl_send_reply() vs t_reply())
depending on whether a transaction context exists.
—
Sent from mobile, with due apologies for brevity and errors.
On Aug 13, 2019, at 3:38 AM, Joel Serrano
<joel(a)textplus.com> wrote:
Great!!! This is good to know!!
Thank you Daniel!
Joel.
On Tue, Aug 13, 2019 at 12:36 AM
Daniel-Constantin Mierla <miconda(a)gmail.com> wrote:
Hello,
that is a "known hack" to go around the route block type restrictions for
functions.
The purpose of the restrictions is to limit the usage in the blocks where the developer
intended to allow the function to be used, like she/he tested for those route blocks or
thought it is enough there and didn't analyze the effects when using in other route
block types.
However, many functions are just safe to use in other route block types than those
imposed by the developer.
Probably the unregister() is safe in onreply block, because it doesn't need to
generate a reply or use information from request URI.
Cheers,
Daniel
_______________________________________________
Kamailio (SER) - Users Mailing List
sr-users(a)lists.kamailio.org
https://lists.kamailio.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sr-users On 13.08.19 07:28, Joel Serrano wrote:
Forgot to add:
root@csbc01:~# kamailio -V
version: kamailio 5.3.0-dev7 (x86_64/linux)
flags: STATS: Off, USE_TCP, USE_TLS, USE_SCTP, TLS_HOOKS, USE_RAW_SOCKS, DISABLE_NAGLE,
USE_MCAST, DNS_IP_HACK, SHM_MMAP, PKG_MALLOC, Q_MALLOC, F_MALLOC, TLSF_MALLOC,
DBG_SR_MEMORY, USE_FUTEX, FAST_LOCK-ADAPTIVE_WAIT, USE_DNS_CACHE, USE_DNS_FAILOVER,
USE_NAPTR, USE_DST_BLACKLIST, HAVE_RESOLV_RES
ADAPTIVE_WAIT_LOOPS 1024, MAX_RECV_BUFFER_SIZE 262144, MAX_URI_SIZE 1024, BUF_SIZE 65535,
DEFAULT PKG_SIZE 8MB
poll method support: poll, epoll_lt, epoll_et, sigio_rt, select.
id: unknown
compiled with gcc 8.3.0
root@csbc01:~#
--
Daniel-Constantin Mierla -- www.asipto.com
www.twitter.com/miconda -- www.linkedin.com/in/miconda On Mon, Aug 12, 2019 at 2:13 PM Joel Serrano
<joel(a)textplus.com> wrote:
Hello,
I'm playing around with the unregister() function from the registrar module:
https://www.kamailio.org/docs/modules/devel/modules/registrar.html#registra…
Docs say that that it can be used in REQUEST_ROUTE or FAILURE_ROUTE.
I needed it in REPLY_ROUTE, and before reading the docs I tried it and got this error:
Aug 12 15:52:44 csbc01 kamailio: CRITICAL: <core> [core/cfg.y:3526]: yyerror_at():
parse error in config file /etc/kamailio/csbc/reply_routes.cfg, line 27, column 71:
Command cannot be used in the block#012
Aug 12 15:52:44 csbc01 kamailio[12737]: ERROR: bad config file (1 errors)
But, I have this working on another setup, I compared, and my difference is that I'm
running unregister() inside a route, and calling that route from reply_route, and that
works (and by works, I mean it also does what it is supposed to do, which is unregister
the AoR).
So this doesn't work:
...
onreply_route[MANAGE_REG_REPLY] {
if(status=~"2[0-9][0-9]") {
if(($sel(contact.expires)==0) || ($hdr(Expires)==0)){
if (unregister("location",
"$sht(sipserver=>$fU::contact)")) {
xlog("L_NOTICE", "[usrloc] removed user
location\n");
}
route(DEL_SIPSERVER);
}
...
But this works:
...
onreply_route[MANAGE_REG_REPLY] {
if(status=~"2[0-9][0-9]") {
if(($sel(contact.expires)==0) || ($hdr(Expires)==0)){
route(UNREG_CUSTOMER);
route(DEL_SIPSERVER);
}
...
...
route[UNREG_CUSTOMER] {
if (unregister("location",
"$sht(sipserver=>$fU::contact)")) {
xlog("L_NOTICE", "[usrloc] removed user
location\n");
}
}
...
So I'm in no-mans-land right now, docs say it's not allowed in REPLY_ROUTE, and
if I try it it will fail, but if I try it inside a route, it woks (hack?).
What is the correct approach here? Should unregister() be valid in reply_route (like
other similar functions, for example: save()) and therefor docs should be updated and the
error in the logs should also be updated, or if it's really not supported,
shouldn't Kamailio not let me use it anywhere that a ends up being called from
reply_route?
I hope I have explained myself correctly. As always, please let me know if this should be
a GH issue instead and I'll happily create it.
Thanks,
Joel.
_______________________________________________
Kamailio (SER) - Users Mailing List
sr-users(a)lists.kamailio.org
https://lists.kamailio.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sr-users
1729
days inactive
1730
days old
5 comments
3 participants
participants (3)
-
Alex Balashov -
Daniel-Constantin Mierla -
Joel Serrano