[Users] ENUM behaviour issue

Klaus Darilion klaus.mailinglists at pernau.at
Mon Aug 8 14:26:14 CEST 2005

Juha Heinanen wrote:
> Daniel-Constantin Mierla writes:
>  > Maybe you can shed some light regarding the priority, what is it good 
>  > for in enum case, how it should be used? In this way, can be decided if 
>  > worth to implement these features. I have other things in my todo list 
>  > in the next days, so I do not want to waste time at all.
> the owner of enum record may have decided that he wants to be first
> contacted at a given uri and, if that fails, at another one, or more
> than one uris simultaneously, etc.  for that purpose enum NAPTR record
> contains two fields, order and preference:
> in my opinion, sip proxy should obey the wish of the enum record owner
> as specified by these two fields.   it is the same as with q values of
> registered contacts.  proxy should not mess around with them.

I agree. Thus, we need serial forking (like in LCR module with AVPs), 
not parallel forking (current behaviour).


More information about the sr-users mailing list