[OpenSER-Devel] Request for comments: sdpparser: module orintegrated into the core

[Edson]

Hi, Ovidus...

Just to let You know that multipart SDP are generated by Cisco GWs (at least
3810 and 5300 models). I don't know there types, I'm not good in SDP, but
seems to be one for codecs and other for facilities.

If You whana a hand, maybe I can help You in this tests...

Edson

>-----Original Message-----
>From: devel-bounces at openser.org [mailto:devel-bounces at openser.org] On
>Behalf Of Ovidiu Sas
>Sent: sexta-feira, 10 de agosto de 2007 11:39
>To: Bogdan-Andrei Iancu
>Cc: devel at openser.org
>Subject: Re: [OpenSER-Devel] Request for comments: sdpparser: module
>orintegrated into the core
>
>Hi Bogdan,
>
>I think that multi-part body parsing should be part of the general
>message parsing.
>The SDP specific parser will be under ./parser/sdp
>There's nothing preventing proper support for multi-part body.
>
>I don't have a SIP UA that generates multi-part body to test how it
>will work ...
>
>
>Regards,
>Ovidiu Sas
>
>On 8/10/07, Bogdan-Andrei Iancu <bogdan at voice-system.ro> wrote:
>> Hi Ovidiu,
>>
>> are there any plans to support multi-part body? in case SDP in one on
>> the parts.....
>>
>> Regards,
>> Bogdan
>>
>> Ovidiu Sas wrote:
>> > Hi Cesc,
>> >
>> > I just ported some existing parsing functions from the nathelper
>> > module (just to minimize the impact to the other modules) and enhance
>> > them.  The idea was to follow the openser generic parser.
>> >
>> >
>> > Ovidiu
>> >
>> > On 8/8/07, Cesc Santa <cesc.santa at gmail.com> wrote:
>> >
>> >> If I may have a say ... I would include this also in the core. And as
>> >> pointed by Bogdan, SDP is signalling also ... so I would not see it so
>bad
>> >> having the parser functions in the core with the option of the modules
>> >> modifying the SDP.
>> >>
>> >> BTW, Ovidiiu ... in your email I read that you are creating the parser
>...
>> >> from scratch? Would not it be a good idea to hunt for an already
>existing
>> >> SDP library and integrate it?
>> >>
>> >> Cesc
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>  On 8/8/07, Bogdan-Andrei Iancu <bogdan at voice-system.ro> wrote:
>> >>
>> >>> Hi Henning,
>> >>>
>> >>> SDP is also signalling part (for media) and we are evaluation _only_
>> >>> parsing functions, not functions to manipulate and do SDP changes.
>> >>>
>> >>> currently there are 2 modules (nathelper and mediaproxy) parsing SDP
>and
>> >>> there is an intense demand for other SDP related functionalities
>(like
>> >>> being able to investigate SDP from script, etc); so makes no sense to
>> >>> have n modules, each implementing a parser.
>> >>>
>> >>> We can have a parser in core and the modules will use it for whatever
>> >>> specific purposes.
>> >>>
>> >>> If you make the parser a module, it will be rather a library than a
>> >>> module and it will create extra inter-module dependencies that we
>> >>> complicate thinks even more.
>> >>>
>> >>> Thanks and regards,
>> >>> Bogdan
>> >>>
>> >>> Henning Westerholt wrote:
>> >>>
>> >>>> On Tuesday 31 July 2007, Bogdan-Andrei Iancu wrote:
>> >>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>>> Hi Ovidiu,
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> If this will be a collection of functions for parsing, I see no
>reason
>> >>>>> for not trying to include them in core. But for such a decision,
>more
>> >>>>> info will be needed.
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>>
>> >>>> Hello,
>> >>>>
>> >>>> integrating SDP parser functionality into the core would be the
>start
>> >>>>
>> >> for
>> >>
>> >>>> providing more and more SDP and media stream related functions in
>> >>>>
>> >> OpenSER.
>> >>
>> >>>> I think we should try to stay on focus.
>> >>>>
>> >>>> - OpenSER is a multi-functional, multi-purpose SIP server: router,
>> >>>>
>> >> switch,
>> >>
>> >>>>   registrar, application server, redirect server, gateway, etc..
>> >>>> - OpenSER is only about signaling, but there are media adds-on
>> >>>>
>> >>>> (some quotes of a VON talk of Bogdan)
>> >>>>
>> >>>> In my opinion we're quite good in this area. But we've already
>enough
>> >>>>
>> >> problems
>> >>
>> >>>> to support SIP and all the strange implementations out there. I
>don't
>> >>>>
>> >> think
>> >>
>> >>>> its a good move to add to much SDP to our problem set.
>> >>>>
>> >>>> So i think a module implementation of a sdp parser would make more
>> >>>>
>> >> sense.
>> >>
>> >>>> Cheers,
>> >>>>
>> >>>> Henning
>> >>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>> _______________________________________________
>> >>> Devel mailing list
>> >>> Devel at openser.org
>> >>> http://openser.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/devel
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >> _______________________________________________
>> >> Devel mailing list
>> >> Devel at openser.org
>> >> http://openser.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/devel
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >
>> >
>>
>>
>
>_______________________________________________
>Devel mailing list
>Devel at openser.org
>http://openser.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/devel