[SR-Dev] Will SIP-Router handle better TCP childs avoiding blocking?

[Iñaki Baz Castillo]

2009/3/3 Juha Heinanen <jh at tutpro.com>:
> Andrei Pelinescu-Onciul writes:
>
>  > The same thing can happen for udp too, albeit only in special cases
>  > (udp send can fail albeit very rarely, the most common case being
>  > firewall rules on output on the local machine that use REJECT).
>  > You don't need to care about the protocol being used. It could be as
>  > simple as checking the return of a t_* function and calling a
>  > route().
>
> i have failure_route that handles failure to deliver a request to a
> contact.  i cannot call failure_route from a route block.

A dirty workaround is having a *route* to handle the failure, and call
that *route* from failure_route or also when "tm_relay" returns error.
Obviously this is really a pain.
I agree in which it would be a homogenous behaviour.


> a logical
> conclusion of your suggestion is to abolish failure_routes completely,
> just have routes.

Instead of that I would really prefer abolishing tm_realy return
codes, but this would require really complex and long scripts (a
failure_route for each tm_realy call).



-- 
Iñaki Baz Castillo
<ibc at aliax.net>