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

[Federico Cabiddu]

Hi Daniel,
yes, sorry I meant local-response!

Cheers,

Federico


On Tue, Aug 27, 2019 at 4:19 PM Daniel-Constantin Mierla <miconda at gmail.com>
wrote:

> 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> 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
>> www.twitter.com/miconda -- www.linkedin.com/in/miconda
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Kamailio (SER) - Users Mailing List
>> sr-users at lists.kamailio.org
>> https://lists.kamailio.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sr-users
>>
> --
> Daniel-Constantin Mierla -- www.asipto.comwww.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/e396020f/attachment.html>