[sr-dev] Headers for IMS Extensions

[Jason Penton]

Hey Henning,

Ahh, thanks for that, thats perfect for now!

A pity, those names should have been a little more descriptive ;)

Thanks
Jason

On Thu, Nov 3, 2011 at 3:27 PM, Henning Westerholt <hw at kamailio.org> wrote:

> On Thursday 03 November 2011, Jason Penton wrote:
> > For Asserted and preferred identities, we don't need to parse the
> content,
> > but in other headers I have not gotten to yet, we may need to.
>
> Hi Jason,
>
> do you talk about p-asserted and p-preferred header? This are fairly
> standard
> headers, there are even some PVs to access them right now i think.
>
> > Please help me understand, I would have thought from an architecture
> > perspective, we would populate the sip_msg structure with all possible
> sip
> > headers  as well as the parsers. What is the reason we don't do this
> > currently? performance?
>
> I'd guess the reasons is memory efficiency. The structure get bigger and
> bigger with every pointer. But for p-asserted and p-preffered, they are
> already included it seems:
>
>        struct hdr_field* pai;
>        struct hdr_field* ppi;
>
> Best regards,
>
> Henning
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.sip-router.org/pipermail/sr-dev/attachments/20111104/8fe59b34/attachment.htm>