RE: [Serusers] append_to_reply and save behaviour - sr-users

22 Jun 2005


      Ok. Thanks!
I thought that the response was sent when the route block ends (that is,
when the 'break' action is reached).
Best regards,
------
Fermín
Agora Systems, S. A.
-----Mensaje original-----
De: Samuel Osorio Calvo [mailto:samuel.osorio@nl.thalesgroup.com] 
Enviado el: miércoles, 22 de junio de 2005 13:15
Para: fermin.galan@agora-2000.com; serdev@lists.iptel.org; serusers@lists.iptel.org
CC: sd-ims@agws.agora-2000.com
Asunto: Re: [Serusers] append_to_reply and save behaviour
The reason is that the function save sends the response and all further
processing can not affect this response (which is already travelling back).
I don't know if it can be called bug, feature, or just design... ;)
SER config file executes the commands sequentially (besides route blocks)
and you have to be careful with the order.
Samuel.
Unclassified.
...
...
...
Fermín Galán Márquez fermin.galan@agora-2000.com 06/22/05 12:47PM >>>
Hello,
I've found and estrange behaviour in the 'append_to_reply' action when used
in conjunction with 'save' action during REGISTER processing.
In particular, if I use in ser.cfg:
...
    append_to_reply("Service-Route:
sip:orig@scscf.domain1.com;lr\r\n");
    save("domain1");
    ...
Then the Service-Route header is added to the "200 OK". But if changing the
relative order of the actions:
...
    save("domain1");
    append_to_reply("Service-Route:
sip:orig@scscf.domain1.com;lr\r\n");
    ...
Then the 'append_to_reply' is ignored: no header is added to the response.
I think is a weird behaviour... I would like to know if this is a bug or a
feature (I have read the textops documentation at
http://www.iptel.org/ser/doc/modules/html/textops.html#AEN104 and nothing
about problems with 'save' are mentioned).
Thank you in advance!
Best regards,
------
Fermín
Agora Systems, S. A.
_______________________________________________
Serusers mailing list
serusers@lists.iptel.org 
http://lists.iptel.org/mailman/listinfo/serusers