[sr-dev] git:master: modules:carrierroute Fix documentation when using cr_route/ t_relay in failure routes

[marius zbihlei]

On 10/01/2010 12:45 PM, Andrei Pelinescu-Onciul wrote:
> On Oct 01, 2010 at 11:30, Andrei Pelinescu-Onciul<andrei at iptel.org>  wrote:
>    
>> On Oct 01, 2010 at 11:28, marius zbihlei<marius.zbihlei at 1and1.ro>  wrote:
>>      
>>> On 10/01/2010 11:10 AM, Iñaki Baz Castillo wrote:
>>>        
>>>> 2010/9/30 Marius Zbihlei<marius.zbihlei at 1and1.ro>:
>>>>          
>>>>> Starting with 3.0 version, there is no need to call append_branch in failure routes
>>>>> before t_relay if the RURI is new(it is done automatically from t_relay).
>>>>>            
>>>> Hi, and what does happen if append_branch() is called anyway?
>>>>
>>>> Thanks.
>>>>
>>>>          
>>> Hello Iñaki,
>>>
>>> Check this thread for the reasoning http://lists.sip-router.org/pipermail/sr-dev/2010-September/009144.html
>>>
>>> It depends on patched version, but I think with 3.0, 2 identical
>>> branches will be created.
>>>        
>> Actually with 3.0 you still need append_branch() after changing RURI.
>> With latest 3.1 nothing will happen (if you call it after changing RURI
>>   it won't add an extra branch).
>>      
>
> One more clarification:  the r-ruri change autodetection (3.1) works
> in all routes, not only in failure routes.
> E.g., if I have in the main route:
>
> t_relay();
> setuser("foo1");
> t_relay();
> setuser("foo2);
> t_relay();
>
> 3 branches will be created: 1 for the original uri, one for foo1@ and
> the last one for foo2 at .
>
> Andrei
>
>    
Hello

Ah, so 3.0 is not affected, only master and upcoming 3.1. Thanks for 
clearing things up, because I didn't had the time to test with 3.0 and I 
only relied on the exchanged emails.

Marius