[sr-dev] sip router and presence setup

[Daniel-Constantin Mierla]

On 1/22/10 4:11 PM, Aymeric Moizard wrote:
>
> Hi again,
>
> Tks for your answers on this topic.
>
> To answer one of your question: my goal is to implement a
> new module for a non standard SIP event package.
>
> Here is a patch for current kamailio 3.0 branch to allow
> adding a new event package without changing the core: (without
> having a new define in the "event" header parser.)
>
> http://sip.antisip.com/patch-siprouter-presence-anypackage.diff

I have applied the patch on git master branch.

Thanks,
Daniel

>
> If the "type" is EVENT_OTHER, the SUBSCRIBE and PUBLISH
> will be accepted if the package name exist in the list.
>
> If this patch doesn't fit you, please let me know how you
> would like it to be!
>
> I'm now working on my new module and have a question: I
> have a specific header in SUBSCRIBE which impact NOTIFY
> contents: do I have any existing way to attach this
> information to my dialog information within "active_watchers"
> database so I can have the information available when
> I'm building my NOTIFY contents? (equivalent to presence
> agregations). Just a hint would be appreciated.
>
> Tks,
> Aymeric MOIZARD / ANTISIP
> amsip - http://www.antisip.com
> osip2 - http://www.osip.org
> eXosip2 - http://savannah.nongnu.org/projects/exosip/
>
>
> On Thu, 21 Jan 2010, Daniel-Constantin Mierla wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> On 1/21/10 4:17 PM, Aymeric Moizard wrote:
>>>>> Last general question: What about mixing kamailio & ser? I've seen
>>>>> for example modules with same namings: "auth" and "auth_db" in both
>>>>> modules_s & modules_k: does this means we can use the same core but
>>>>> have to choose between using modules_s or modules_k?
>>>>
>>>> You can mix, but not arbitrarily. The biggest difference between 
>>>> ser and kamailio is the database structure. ser uses a new database 
>>>> schema with numeric user-ids which map to SIP AoR. kamailio still 
>>>> uses the old (ser 0.9.x) database schema where every user has a 
>>>> fixed AoR.
>>>>
>>>> Therefore you can not mix modules which require different database 
>>>> layouts.
>>>>
>>>> Thus, in your scenario you have to mix database layouts: 
>>>> provisioning/location from ser and presence from kamailio. That 
>>>> might work. But probably much easier would be to use kamailio 
>>>> modules only (unless you need numeric user ids).
>>>
>>> Then my first comment would be: why have the "pa" been removed
>>
>> I guess it was no longer update to work with latest core and db apis.
>>
>>> if it's
>>> not possible to use the presence module from kamailio...
>>
>> you can use them, they are pretty much independent of the subscriber 
>> table and profile, you just create the afferent tables from kamailio.
>>
>>>
>>> In my mind, presence & presence_xml are using different independant 
>>> database table and doesn't conflict with ser database?
>>
>> Right.
>>
>>>
>>> Most probably, there could be conflict with modules that depends
>>> on usrloc for example? (like pua_usrloc) Looking at developper APIs,
>>> for both usrloc kam/ser modules they are very close.
>>
>> I haven't checked ser usrloc, we did some changes in K, some of them 
>> for presence purpose and for using the pua_usrloc you have to use K 
>> usrloc and registrar modules and from here nathelper module.
>>
>>>
>>> I don't fully understand yet what "numeric user ids" are, but I 
>>> would really like to use the ser database layout for 
>>> user/location/credentials which seems really flexible compared to 
>>> kamailio.
>>
>> Doing auth with ser modules and using presence/usrloc from K should 
>> be just fine.
>>
>>>
>>> So where sip-router is going? Do you target to have only the same
>>> core for both kamailio & ser, but still be different projects?
>>
>> Goal is to remove duplication as much as possible. However, the db 
>> related things are the most sensitive, since people have management 
>> application relying on certain structure.
>>
>>>
>>> Is having a common database layout an objective of the sip-router
>>> project?
>>
>> Yes, but I would say it will be the last to happen -- there will be 
>> quite some debates around.
>>
>>>
>>> If I intent to implement to additionnal event package, do you advise
>>> me to stick with kamailio subscriber layout?
>>
>> presence and subscriber profiles are quite independent.
>>>
>>> I finally understood why my "make deb" was compiling a ser version:
>>> I just forgot to checkout the kamailio branch... That was also a
>>> source of confusion for understanding why normal step for the
>>> kamailio branch was to setup a ser database layout... Because
>>> of that error, I though first the same layout was already used...
>>
>> A bit inconvenient with git, indeed, but I could not find how to 
>> fetch easily only the branch to give such guidelines.
>>
>> Cheers,
>> Daniel
>>
>>>
>>> Tks,
>>> Aymeric MOIZARD / ANTISIP
>>> amsip - http://www.antisip.com
>>> osip2 - http://www.osip.org
>>> eXosip2 - http://savannah.nongnu.org/projects/exosip/
>>>
>>>
>>>> regards
>>>> klaus
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Tks much for your help & advise,
>>>>>
>>>>> Aymeric MOIZARD / ANTISIP
>>>>> amsip - http://www.antisip.com
>>>>> osip2 - http://www.osip.org
>>>>> eXosip2 - http://savannah.nongnu.org/projects/exosip/
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> sr-dev mailing list
>>>>> sr-dev at lists.sip-router.org
>>>>> http://lists.sip-router.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sr-dev
>>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> 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/
>>
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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/