[Serdev] usrloc loading

[Carsten Bock]

Hi there,

This example is stupid! It is like copying the contents of a website
into M$ Word and then claim M$ Word would break copyright laws....

Carsten

Am Mittwoch, den 24.01.2007, 13:45 +0100 schrieb Michal Matyska:
> Sorry for the thread intervention.... here are the facts:
> (openser CVS HEAD updated few minutes ago)
> #cat breakrfc.cfg
> listen=lo
> 
> loadmodule "./modules/sl/sl.so"
> loadmodule "./modules/textops/textops.so"
> 
> route{
>         sl_reply("99999","Wh4t duya phink?\r\nVia: I hate RFC SIP/2.0
> skype rulez\r\nFrom:\r\nFrom:\r\nFrom:");
> }
> 
> #./openser -f breakrfc.cfg
> # sipp -sn uac -m 1 localhost:5060
> 
> #tshark -r breakrfc.pcap
>   1   0.000000    127.0.0.1 -> 127.0.0.1    SIP/SDP Request: INVITE
> sip:service at 127.0.0.1:5060, with session description
>   2   0.000478    127.0.0.1 -> 127.0.0.1    SIP Status: 999 Wh4t duya
> phink?
>   3   0.001066    127.0.0.1 -> 127.0.0.1    SIP Request: ACK
> sip:service at 127.0.0.1:5060
> 
> (pcap attached ;-)
> 
> 
> The more powerfull tool you have the more you have to be cautious....
> you can cut the tree with the saw, but you can cut your fingers.
> 
> Howgh, Michal
> 
> P.S. The same applies to SER of course.
> 
> On Wed, 2007-01-24 at 13:37 +0200, Bogdan-Andrei Iancu wrote:
> > Hi Greger,
> > 
> > I'm sorry that my email upset you and please accept my apologies for that.
> > 
> > After all you posted a personal opinion about something (about OpenSER 
> > ,in this case) and I asked if you could detail / explain this opinion. I 
> > think all subscribers have the right to be correctly informed on the 
> > matters discussed here, but I see you refuse my possibility to 
> > contribute on this :(.
> > 
> > BTW, as you are involved in the administration of the project, can you 
> > check what happens with my emails - they do not rich the list (even if 
> > I'm subscribed) :(
> > 
> > Thanks and regards,
> > Bogdan
> > 
> > Greger V. Teigre wrote:
> > 
> > > Hi Bogdan,
> > > This was an element in a discussion about ser, not openser. I'm not 
> > > interested in having a discussion about openser on serdev beyond 
> > > comparisons that may set ser in some perspective, and I find your 
> > > interruption quite tedious and self-centered. However, if you have 
> > > opinions about ser that are relevant to the discussion, you are 
> > > welcome to join.
> > >
> > > If you reread my post, you will see that my argument is that both ser 
> > > and openser make it too easy too create ser.cfgs that break the RFC. 
> > > Quite far from how you read it.
> > >
> > > Previous openser/ser discussions on serusers and serdev have not been 
> > > very fruitful, ex. the performance discussions. If you want a dialog 
> > > for the benefit of users or joint development work, feel free to make 
> > > a proposal, but please refrain from self-righteous posts on serusers 
> > > and serdev. You should allow SER users and developers to discuss ser 
> > > from all sorts of perspectives without disturbing with your agenda. 
> > > This is a privilege I believe the openser community enjoys on the 
> > > openser lists.
> > >
> > > Considering that your historical default response in discussions is to 
> > > state your opinion and then be silent, I assume this discussion is dead.
> > >
> > > Regards,
> > > Greger
> > >
> > > Bogdan-Andrei Iancu wrote:
> > >
> > >> Hi Greger,
> > >>
> > >> OpenSER does not "pretend" to be everything to everybody, but tries 
> > >> as much as possible to respond to the user's feedback (reports, 
> > >> needs, etc).
> > >>
> > >> I know it is your HO, but can you be more specific (just list one or 
> > >> two cases maybe) where you think OpenSER breaks RFCs?? I always 
> > >> though that backing up with facts puts more strength in words.
> > >>
> > >> actually being RFC-compliant is one of the top requirements we have 
> > >> as project and a lot of effort was put in this direction (RFC3261 - 
> > >> correct via building, RFC3263 - complete algh implementation for 
> > >> server discovery, etc)
> > >>
> > >> regards,
> > >> bogdan
> > >>
> > >> Greger V. Teigre wrote:
> > >>
> > >>> :-) In fact, to me, OpenSER seems to pretend that it is all things 
> > >>> to all people. That may work for a while (and in fact, maybe we 
> > >>> should send some people to OpenSER...) IMHO, it seems that OpenSER 
> > >>> is going in the opposite direction of SER by introducing all sorts 
> > >>> of "special case" functionality that confuses people and allows them 
> > >>> to break more parts of the RFCs.
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >
> > 
> > _______________________________________________
> > Serdev mailing list
> > Serdev at lists.iptel.org
> > http://lists.iptel.org/mailman/listinfo/serdev
> _______________________________________________
> Serdev mailing list
> Serdev at lists.iptel.org
> http://lists.iptel.org/mailman/listinfo/serdev