5 Feb
2008
5 Feb
'08
9:59 a.m.
On Monday 04 February 2008 19:02:30 Dan-Cristian Bogos wrote:
Iñaki,
this code should do the magic:
if (!t_reply("202", "Accepted"))
{
sl_reply_error();
};
I use exactly that code:
t_newtran();
if (m_store("$ru")) {
if (!t_reply("202", "Accepted"))
sl_reply_error();
}
But there is not a created MESSAGE by OpenSer to the sender. I've
set "debug=4" and no errors appear, the message storage is done correctly and
OpenSer doesn't try to send back a new MESSAGE as notification.
I'd like to insist a bit in the fact that what I'm trying to get is receiving
a **new** MESSAGE generated by OpenSer as notification to the sender, not
just the "202, Accept" reply (that is a reply, not a MESSAGE).
Please Dan, can you confirm that MSILO module should generate and send a new
MESSAGE as notification to the sender, and not just a "202 Accepted" reply?
Thanks a lot.
--
Iñaki Baz Castillo
ibc(a)in.ilimit.es
5 Feb
5 Feb
10:04 a.m.
New subject: [OpenSER-Users] MSILO back notify not working
Hi Inaki,
AFAIK the module do not have this functionality - to send back
notification when a message is stored.
Regards,
Bogdan
Iñaki Baz Castillo wrote:
On Monday 04 February 2008 19:02:30 Dan-Cristian Bogos
wrote:
Iñaki,
this code should do the magic:
if (!t_reply("202", "Accepted"))
{
sl_reply_error();
};
I use exactly that code:
t_newtran();
if (m_store("$ru")) {
if (!t_reply("202", "Accepted"))
sl_reply_error();
}
But there is not a created MESSAGE by OpenSer to the sender. I've
set "debug=4" and no errors appear, the message storage is done correctly and
OpenSer doesn't try to send back a new MESSAGE as notification.
I'd like to insist a bit in the fact that what I'm trying to get is receiving
a **new** MESSAGE generated by OpenSer as notification to the sender, not
just the "202, Accept" reply (that is a reply, not a MESSAGE).
Please Dan, can you confirm that MSILO module should generate and send a new
MESSAGE as notification to the sender, and not just a "202 Accepted" reply?
Thanks a lot.
10:08 a.m.
New subject: [OpenSER-Users] MSILO back notify not working
Iñaki,
it looks like I have misunderstood your problem.
I was speaking about "202 Accepted" confirmation and not a new MESSAGE. Why
would you need a new message?
As Bogdan confirmed also, I am also not aware of module generating a stand
alone notification, and I am using this module since beginnings.
Cheers,
DanB
On Feb 5, 2008 9:59 AM, Iñaki Baz Castillo <ibc(a)in.ilimit.es> wrote:
On Monday 04 February 2008 19:02:30 Dan-Cristian Bogos
wrote:
Iñaki,
this code should do the magic:
if (!t_reply("202", "Accepted"))
{
sl_reply_error();
};
I use exactly that code:
t_newtran();
if (m_store("$ru")) {
if (!t_reply("202", "Accepted"))
sl_reply_error();
}
But there is not a created MESSAGE by OpenSer to the sender. I've
set "debug=4" and no errors appear, the message storage is done correctly
and
OpenSer doesn't try to send back a new MESSAGE as notification.
I'd like to insist a bit in the fact that what I'm trying to get is
receiving
a **new** MESSAGE generated by OpenSer as notification to the sender, not
just the "202, Accept" reply (that is a reply, not a MESSAGE).
Please Dan, can you confirm that MSILO module should generate and send a
new
MESSAGE as notification to the sender, and not just a "202 Accepted"
reply?
Thanks a lot.
--
Iñaki Baz Castillo
ibc(a)in.ilimit.es
_______________________________________________
Users mailing list
Users(a)lists.openser.org
http://lists.openser.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users
10:26 a.m.
New subject: [OpenSER-Users] MSILO back notify not working
Hello,
On 02/05/08 11:08, Dan-Cristian Bogos wrote:
Iñaki,
it looks like I have misunderstood your problem.
I was speaking about "202 Accepted" confirmation and not a new
MESSAGE. Why would you need a new message?
As Bogdan confirmed also, I am also not aware of module generating a
stand alone notification, and I am using this module since beginnings.
the module
does have the ability to send notifications back when the
user is offline.
Inaki, as I could see, you have set the "registrar" parameter of the
module, so the notification should be sent out. Can you set debug=4 and
send the output to me along with the capture of "ngrep -d any port 5060"?
Cheers,
Daniel
Cheers,
DanB
On Feb 5, 2008 9:59 AM, Iñaki Baz Castillo <ibc(a)in.ilimit.es
<mailto:ibc@in.ilimit.es>> wrote:
On Monday 04 February 2008 19:02:30 Dan-Cristian Bogos wrote:
Iñaki,
this code should do the magic:
if (!t_reply("202", "Accepted"))
{
sl_reply_error();
};
I use exactly that code:
t_newtran();
if (m_store("$ru")) {
if (!t_reply("202", "Accepted"))
sl_reply_error();
}
But there is not a created MESSAGE by OpenSer to the sender. I've
set "debug=4" and no errors appear, the message storage is done
correctly and
OpenSer doesn't try to send back a new MESSAGE as notification.
I'd like to insist a bit in the fact that what I'm trying to get
is receiving
a **new** MESSAGE generated by OpenSer as notification to the
sender, not
just the "202, Accept" reply (that is a reply, not a MESSAGE).
Please Dan, can you confirm that MSILO module should generate and
send a new
MESSAGE as notification to the sender, and not just a "202
Accepted" reply?
Thanks a lot.
--
Iñaki Baz Castillo
ibc(a)in.ilimit.es <mailto:ibc@in.ilimit.es>
_______________________________________________
Users mailing list
Users(a)lists.openser.org <mailto:Users@lists.openser.org>
http://lists.openser.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users
------------------------------------------------------------------------
_______________________________________________
Users mailing list
Users(a)lists.openser.org
http://lists.openser.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users
10:37 a.m.
New subject: [OpenSER-Users] MSILO back notify not working
On Tuesday 05 February 2008 10:08:16 Dan-Cristian Bogos wrote:
Iñaki,
it looks like I have misunderstood your problem.
I was speaking about "202 Accepted" confirmation and not a new MESSAGE.
Yes, that was what I meant ;)
Why would you need a new message?
Because it's the only way that any UAC will show the notification to its user.
For example:
- If X-Lite sends a MESSAGE and it's stored and replied by proxy with "202
Accepted" then XLite UI will show nothing to the user, but message correctly
received by destination, so he will think that the destinaiton is ireceiving
him messages but ignoring them.
- If the message is stored and proxy replies "404 User Not Found, MEssage
Stored" then XLite will just show in the UI: "404 User is not online".
- Twinkle will not show the code description for a 202, but it will do it in a
negative reply (404 for example), but Twinkle IM is not very advanced yet in
usability terms.
Best regards.
--
Iñaki Baz Castillo
ibc(a)in.ilimit.es
11:35 a.m.
New subject: [OpenSER-Users] MSILO back notify not working
There is bug mistakenly introduced about 2 years ago, if I could spot it
right on the svn log. A wrong variable for registrar address was used. I
have just made a commit on trunk. Can you test and let me know if works
now? If you need patch for 1.3 I can send it to you -- I will backport
after some testing is done.
Thanks,
Daniel
On 02/05/08 11:37, Iñaki Baz Castillo wrote:
On Tuesday 05 February 2008 10:08:16 Dan-Cristian
Bogos wrote:
Iñaki,
it looks like I have misunderstood your problem.
I was speaking about "202 Accepted" confirmation and not a new MESSAGE.
Yes, that was what I meant ;)
Why would you need a new message?
Because it's the only way that any UAC will show the notification to its user.
For example:
- If X-Lite sends a MESSAGE and it's stored and replied by proxy with "202
Accepted" then XLite UI will show nothing to the user, but message correctly
received by destination, so he will think that the destinaiton is ireceiving
him messages but ignoring them.
- If the message is stored and proxy replies "404 User Not Found, MEssage
Stored" then XLite will just show in the UI: "404 User is not online".
- Twinkle will not show the code description for a 202, but it will do it in a
negative reply (404 for example), but Twinkle IM is not very advanced yet in
usability terms.
Best regards.
11:52 a.m.
New subject: [OpenSER-Users] MSILO back notify not working
I would like to have patch for 1.3.0 too :-)
Thanks, regards
kokoska.rokoska
Daniel-Constantin Mierla napsal(a):
There is bug mistakenly introduced about 2 years ago,
if I could spot it
right on the svn log. A wrong variable for registrar address was used. I
have just made a commit on trunk. Can you test and let me know if works
now? If you need patch for 1.3 I can send it to you -- I will backport
after some testing is done.
Thanks,
Daniel
On 02/05/08 11:37, Iñaki Baz Castillo wrote:
On Tuesday 05 February 2008 10:08:16 Dan-Cristian
Bogos wrote:
_______________________________________________
Users mailing list
Users(a)lists.openser.org
http://lists.openser.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users
Iñaki,
it looks like I have misunderstood your problem.
I was speaking about "202 Accepted" confirmation and not a new MESSAGE.
Yes, that was what I meant ;)
Why would you need a new message?
Because it's the only way that any UAC will show the notification to its
user.
For example:
- If X-Lite sends a MESSAGE and it's stored and replied by proxy with "202
Accepted" then XLite UI will show nothing to the user, but message correctly
received by destination, so he will think that the destinaiton is ireceiving
him messages but ignoring them.
- If the message is stored and proxy replies "404 User Not Found, MEssage
Stored" then XLite will just show in the UI: "404 User is not online".
- Twinkle will not show the code description for a 202, but it will do it in a
negative reply (404 for example), but Twinkle IM is not very advanced yet in
usability terms.
Best regards.
12:09 p.m.
New subject: [OpenSER-Users] MSILO back notify not working
On 02/05/08 12:52, kokoska rokoska wrote:
I would like to have patch for 1.3.0 too :-)
thanks for volunteering to test. Here is the attached patch. Let me know
if works so I can commit on SVN.
Cheers,
Daniel
Thanks, regards
kokoska.rokoska
Daniel-Constantin Mierla napsal(a):
There is bug mistakenly introduced about 2 years
ago, if I could spot it
right on the svn log. A wrong variable for registrar address was used. I
have just made a commit on trunk. Can you test and let me know if works
now? If you need patch for 1.3 I can send it to you -- I will backport
after some testing is done.
Thanks,
Daniel
On 02/05/08 11:37, Iñaki Baz Castillo wrote:
_______________________________________________
Users mailing list
Users(a)lists.openser.org
http://lists.openser.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users
On Tuesday 05 February 2008 10:08:16 Dan-Cristian
Bogos wrote:
_______________________________________________
Users mailing list
Users(a)lists.openser.org
http://lists.openser.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users
Iñaki,
it looks like I have misunderstood your problem.
I was speaking about "202 Accepted" confirmation and not a new MESSAGE.
Yes, that was what I meant ;)
Why would you need a new message?
Because it's the only way that any UAC will show the notification to
its user.
For example:
- If X-Lite sends a MESSAGE and it's stored and replied by proxy with "202
Accepted" then XLite UI will show nothing to the user, but message correctly
received by destination, so he will think that the destinaiton is ireceiving
him messages but ignoring them.
- If the message is stored and proxy replies "404 User Not Found, MEssage
Stored" then XLite will just show in the UI: "404 User is not online".
- Twinkle will not show the code description for a 202, but it will do it in a
negative reply (404 for example), but Twinkle IM is not very advanced yet in
usability terms.
Best regards.
6 Feb
6 Feb
9:01 a.m.
New subject: [OpenSER-Users] MSILO back notify not working
Hi Daniel,
for the first look I think it works :-) Thnak you very much!
Regards,
kokoska.rokoska
Daniel-Constantin Mierla napsal(a):
On 02/05/08 12:52, kokoska rokoska wrote:
I would like to have patch for 1.3.0 too :-)
thanks for volunteering to test. Here is the attached patch. Let me know
if works so I can commit on SVN.
Cheers,
Daniel
> Thanks, regards
>
> kokoska.rokoska
>
> Daniel-Constantin Mierla napsal(a):
>
>> There is bug mistakenly introduced about 2 years ago, if I could spot
>> it right on the svn log. A wrong variable for registrar address was
>> used. I have just made a commit on trunk. Can you test and let me
>> know if works now? If you need patch for 1.3 I can send it to you --
>> I will backport after some testing is done.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Daniel
>>
>>
>> On 02/05/08 11:37, Iñaki Baz Castillo wrote:
>>
>>> On Tuesday 05 February 2008 10:08:16 Dan-Cristian Bogos wrote:
>>>
>>>> Iñaki,
>>>>
>>>> it looks like I have misunderstood your problem.
>>>>
>>>> I was speaking about "202 Accepted" confirmation and not a new
>>>> MESSAGE.
>>> Yes, that was what I meant ;)
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>> Why would you need a new message?
>>>>
>>> Because it's the only way that any UAC will show the notification to
>>> its user. For example:
>>>
>>> - If X-Lite sends a MESSAGE and it's stored and replied by proxy
>>> with "202 Accepted" then XLite UI will show nothing to the user,
but
>>> message correctly received by destination, so he will think that the
>>> destinaiton is ireceiving him messages but ignoring them.
>>>
>>> - If the message is stored and proxy replies "404 User Not Found,
>>> MEssage Stored" then XLite will just show in the UI: "404 User is
>>> not online".
>>>
>>> - Twinkle will not show the code description for a 202, but it will
>>> do it in a negative reply (404 for example), but Twinkle IM is not
>>> very advanced yet in usability terms.
>>>
>>>
>>> Best regards.
>>>
>>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Users mailing list
>> Users(a)lists.openser.org
>> http://lists.openser.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users
>>
>>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Users mailing list
> Users(a)lists.openser.org
> http://lists.openser.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users
>
>
5 Feb
5 Feb
12:09 p.m.
New subject: [OpenSER-Users] MSILO back notify not working
On Tuesday 05 February 2008 11:35:30 Daniel-Constantin Mierla wrote:
There is bug mistakenly introduced about 2 years ago,
if I could spot it
right on the svn log. A wrong variable for registrar address was used. I
have just made a commit on trunk. Can you test and let me know if works
now? If you need patch for 1.3 I can send it to you -- I will backport
after some testing is done.
I can confirm that it works. This is the OpenSer generated MESSAGE
notification:
------------------
U 2008/02/05 11:57:18.836256 88.99.0.110:5060 -> 89.99.0.110:5060
MESSAGE sip:ibc@domain.org SIP/2.0
Via: SIP/2.0/UDP 88.98.0.110;branch=z9hG4bKa5c8.2002ba97.0
To: sip:ibc@domain.org
From:
sip:user-offline@openser.domain.org;tag=8e8dc05fff8d3172da4bb428a9d4a223-faf8
CSeq: 10 MESSAGE
Call-ID: 5ddfefd8-24012(a)80.94.0.110
Content-Length: 91
User-Agent: OpenSER (1.4.0dev2-tls (i386/linux))
Content-Type: text/plain
Contact: <sip:user-offline@openser.domain.org>;msilo=yes
User [sip:angel@domain.org] is offline. The message will be delivered when
user goes online.
------------------
As a suggestion, wouldn't be better is the From in the notification MESSAGE
would be the destination in order to avoid a new IM window in the sender?
It's not cool that for each message I send and is stored I receive a new IM.
Maybe this could be a feature request? :)
Thanks a lot for all.
--
Iñaki Baz Castillo
ibc(a)in.ilimit.es
8:11 p.m.
New subject: [OpenSER-Users] MSILO back notify not working
Iñaki Baz Castillo writes:
Because it's the only way that any UAC will show
the notification to
its user.
in my opinion it is UA's problem if it does not distinguish between 200
and 202 replies, i.e., i don't see any need to change msilo module.
-- juha
9:02 p.m.
New subject: [OpenSER-Users] MSILO back notify not working
El Martes, 5 de Febrero de 2008, Juha Heinanen escribió:
Iñaki Baz Castillo writes:
Hi Juha, let me knowif I understand the expected behaviour according to some
RFC's:
RFC3428 (MESSAGE) says:
"If the UAC receives a 202 Accepted response, the message
has been delivered to a gateway, store and forward server, or some
other service that may eventually deliver the message. In this case,
the UAC MUST NOT assume the message has been delivered to the final
destination."
"A UAS which is, in fact, a message relay, storing the message and
forwarding it later on, or forwarding it into a non-SIP domain,
SHOULD return a 202 (Accepted) [5] response indicating that the
message was accepted, but end to end delivery has not been
guaranteed."
[5] is RFC 3265 (Specific Event Notification)
RFC 3265 says:
"7.3.1. "202 Accepted" Response Code
The 202 response is added to the "Success" header field definition.
"202 Accepted" has the same meaning as that defined in HTTP/1.1 [3]."
So I understand that a server responding "202 Accepted" could/should include
a "Success" header with the description (maybe "User Offline, message
stored"). Is it?
Anyway I think the behavior is not very clearly explained (reading two RFC's
is required for something so simple...), so I understand that is not well
implemented in most UACs.
Anyway, do you know any UAC notifing the user when a 202 is received with the
reply code description or "Success" header?
Because it's the only way that any UAC will
show the notification to
its user.
in my opinion it is UA's problem if it does not distinguish between 200
and 202 replies , i.e., i don't see any need to change msilo
module.
Neither me because... msilo does already do what I want !!! XDDD
Read the reply of Daniel in this thread, it was a bug since 2 years that he
has fixed today and I confirm it works ;)
Regards.
--
Iñaki Baz Castillo
11:54 p.m.
New subject: [OpenSER-Users] MSILO back notify not working
El Martes, 5 de Febrero de 2008, Iñaki Baz Castillo escribió:
RFC 3265 says:
"7.3.1. "202 Accepted" Response Code
The 202 response is added to the "Success" header field definition.
"202 Accepted" has the same meaning as that defined in HTTP/1.1 [3]."
Now I've read again and am not sure:
Does it mean that it could be a "Success" header to inform the UAC about the
storage of him message? I've never read about a SIP "Success" header so
maybe
it means the "202" code description (instead of "Accepted")?
--
Iñaki Baz Castillo
5948
days inactive
5949
days old
12 comments
7 participants
participants (7)
-
Bogdan-Andrei Iancu -
Dan-Cristian Bogos -
Daniel-Constantin Mierla -
Iñaki Baz Castillo -
Iñaki Baz Castillo -
jh＠tutpro.com -
kokoska rokoska