[sr-dev] Outbound summary

[Martin Hoffmann]

Peter Dunkley wrote:
> On Thu, 2012-08-09 at 10:10 +0200, Martin Hoffmann wrote:
> 
>> I'd prefer if we could do this through config and only enhance the C
>> APIs where needed. With the new include logics and whatnot, this can
>> come in the form of a config library.
> 
> You can do includes but you can't put complex functions with
> parameters into a config library.  So you would end up having to do it
> as routes with pseudo-variables to pass data around.

Yes. Maybe we can fix that, too? Adding route arguments shouldn't be too
hard, if you do it shell style (just a list of arguments, accessible
inside the route through PVs $0, $1, etc.).

> I think this
> would be very messy for something as complex as Outbound - and there
> is always the chance you might use a route-name or variable name that
> someone else has (making it hard for them to add Outbound support to
> an existing configuration).

I don't think outbound is all that complex. Pretty much the only change
that is really very fundamental is the serial routing lookup for
same-instance clients. The rest is pretty much there.

> A lot of the business logic for Outbound will be done in the
> configuration anyway (failure-routes to generate/convert status to 430
> and so on) mainly because this is right place for that stuff, but
> surely a new module that has drop-in replacements for existing
> functions (like record_route(), loose_route(), lookup() and so on) is
> going to be easier for people to work with?

Assuming you can't fit outbound into the existing functions (which, I
think would only be the case with lookup()), I'd rather have new
functions within the existing modules.
 
Regards,
Martin