[Kamailio-Devel] [ openser-Feature Requests-2159383 ] 'reply' function involving 'sl_reply' and 't_reply'

[SourceForge.net]

Feature Requests item #2159383, was opened at 2008-10-11 13:47
Message generated for change (Comment added) made by nobody
You can respond by visiting: 
https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=743023&aid=2159383&group_id=139143

Please note that this message will contain a full copy of the comment thread,
including the initial issue submission, for this request,
not just the latest update.
Category: modules
Group: ver devel
Status: Open
Resolution: None
Priority: 5
Private: No
Submitted By: Iaki Baz (ibc_sf)
Assigned to: Nobody/Anonymous (nobody)
Summary: 'reply' function involving 'sl_reply' and 't_reply'

Initial Comment:
Hi, IMHO is not very friendly being dealing with 'sl_reply' or 't_reply' depending on if the transaction has been already created.

Sometimes it's not clear which one to use (for example if we are processing on_reply_route and so).

I know that both "t_reply" and "sl_reply" belong to different modules (tm and sl) but it could be nice a new function just called "reply" that would call the appropiate function t_reply or sl_reply depending on the existance of the transaction.

This is:

  if xxxxx {
    reply("403", "Forbidden");
  }

  on_failure_route[1] {
  if xxxxx {
    reply("500", "Bad gateway");
  }


Is it feasible?

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Comment By: Nobody/Anonymous (nobody)
Date: 2008-10-11 14:01

Message:
i'm not convinced yet that this is needed.  in my script i forward all
requests statefully so i know that when reply comes, i need to process it
statefully.  are you saying that you forward some requests stafully and
some statelessly?  perhaps you can give another example.

-- juha


----------------------------------------------------------------------

You can respond by visiting: 
https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=743023&aid=2159383&group_id=139143