[sr-dev] [SR-Users] RFC: about sl and tm local-response event routes

[Daniel-Constantin Mierla]

Hi Federico,

local-request stays the same (that's rather used based on mailing list
discussions).

I proposed to change the local-response to local-response-sent (I don't
remember any discussion about people using it, I checked the commit log
and was added by Peter Dunkley several years ago, I never used it so far).

Cheers,
Daniel

On 27.08.19 16:04, Federico Cabiddu wrote:
> Hi Daniel,
> personally I have just one case of local-request, so it wouldn't hurt
> too much this change that brings consistency.
>
> Cheers,
>
> Federico
>
> On Tue, Aug 27, 2019 at 1:37 PM Daniel-Constantin Mierla
> <miconda at gmail.com <mailto:miconda at gmail.com>> wrote:
>
>     Hello,
>
>     just discovered what I consider to be an inconsistency in naming and
>     behaviour for event_route blocks for local-request and local-response
>     and starting a discussion here to see how to move on.
>
>     The event_route[tm:local-request] is executed before sending there
>     local
>     generated request out (allowing also to change its content, drop,
>     etc...). This event route is quite popular event route used when the
>     local generated requests need to be checked or updates.
>
>     The event_route[tm:local-response] is executed after the response is
>     sent out, obviously no possibility to change anymore the content. I
>     haven't checked the code for event_route[sl:local-response], but based
>     on commit message should be the same.
>
>     I haven't used the local-response so far at all, today after a
>     discussion on sr-users I wanted to enable kemi callback for
>     tm:local-response and I noticed that behaviour in the code, even I
>     expected to be like local-request (before sending out).
>
>     I am not sure how much used are the event routes for tm:local-response
>     and sl:local-response, I haven't seen any questions about them so
>     far on
>     mailing lists, that's why I am asking here if would make sense to
>     rename
>     them like tm:local-response-sent and sl:local-response-sent to
>     properly
>     reflect when they are executed. I am  expecting that they are very few
>     used so far,  so no big head ache with upgrades and bringing some
>     consistency around (this change to be part of next major release).
>
>     It can stay like now with proper documentation, however in the
>     future if
>     one want and event route for local responses before being sent out,
>     there will be more confusion, imo ...
>
>     Cheers,
>     Daniel
>
>     -- 
>     Daniel-Constantin Mierla -- www.asipto.com <http://www.asipto.com>
>     www.twitter.com/miconda <http://www.twitter.com/miconda> --
>     www.linkedin.com/in/miconda <http://www.linkedin.com/in/miconda>
>
>
>     _______________________________________________
>     Kamailio (SER) - Users Mailing List
>     sr-users at lists.kamailio.org <mailto:sr-users at lists.kamailio.org>
>     https://lists.kamailio.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sr-users
>
-- 
Daniel-Constantin Mierla -- www.asipto.com
www.twitter.com/miconda -- www.linkedin.com/in/miconda

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.kamailio.org/pipermail/sr-dev/attachments/20190827/4c6f9925/attachment.html>