[sr-dev] AVPs in replies?

[Daniel-Constantin Mierla]

Hello,

Andrei, instead of having K compat mode, as global parameter, I would 
prefer to have per transaction function:

t_lock_onreply()

Gives more flexibility.

Cheers,
Daniel

On 12/10/09 12:16 PM, Andrei Pelinescu-Onciul wrote:
> On Dec 10, 2009 at 12:57, Juha Heinanen<jh at tutpro.com>  wrote:
>    
>> Andrei Pelinescu-Onciul writes:
>>
>>   >  What I'm afraid is that executing the reply route under lock might
>>   >  introduce some deadlocks (it is possible that some functions that are now
>>   >  allowed to be executed from the onreply route would cause problems, I
>>   >  haven't checked all of them).
>>
>> what could those be?  i test/set flags/avps/vars and call functions that
>> rewrite some parts of the message, like contact uri and sdp.
>>      
> tm functions or functions that use tm api and try to lock replies (lock
> the transaction reply_lock). I don't know of any and I don't think we'll
> have any problems, but I haven't checked everything.
> All the k modules functions that worked in k with the reply avp mode
> will work with sr too so this leaves possible problems only in
> modules_s.
> Everything you mentioned above won't cause any problems.
>    
>>   >  The long term solution would be to lock only the avps and only when used,
>>   >  but it requires lots of changes and testing and I'm not sure it would be
>>   >  ready/good enough for 3.0.
>>
>> not for 3.0, which, in my opinion, we should get out before end of this
>> year.
>>      
> Yes, I agree.
>
> Andrei
>
> _______________________________________________
> sr-dev mailing list
> sr-dev at lists.sip-router.org
> http://lists.sip-router.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sr-dev
>    

-- 
Daniel-Constantin Mierla
* http://www.asipto.com/