[OpenSER-Devel] Request for comments: new routing module

[Klaus Darilion]

Daniel-Constantin Mierla wrote:
> 
> 
> On 07/31/07 19:10, Dan Pascu wrote:
>> On Tuesday 31 July 2007, Henning Westerholt wrote:
>>  
>>> On Tuesday 31 July 2007, Klaus Darilion wrote:
>>>    
>>>> Thus, for me it is ok if it is included to openser.
>>>>       
>>> Ok, do you have a suggesting for a name? Perhaps "route" as module
>>> name, and prefix the functions with "r_"?
>>>     
>>
>> "routing" as module name sounds better IMO.
>>   
> I had no time to review the description of the module, however, for me, 
> using this kind of name related to route/routing will introduce 
> confusions discussing and referring configuration file (we have "route" 
> blocks, we refer a lot to "routing" logic), perhaps a name that should 
> make clear a difference would be much better -- just my opinion (e.g., 
> sprouting, as I understand already has similar name).


I agree with Daniel. I immediately thought about record-routing/loose 
routing and that i might confuse users. What about "prefixbasedrouting"?

I couldn't find a better one :-(