[Serusers] [Serdev] SER Release 2 Query..

[Michal Matyska]

On Sun, 2007-10-28 at 21:38 -0800, Piyush.Bansal at relianceada.com wrote:
> 
> Hi jiri, 
> 
> As per your suggestion, we tried to use release 2-0.0-rc1 for our
> usage. As far as the scripts are concerned to create database schema,
> the problem remains the same i.e. in the script there is No Provision
> For Creating subscriber and uri_db Table. 

Neither subscriber nor uri_db tables are used anymore.... thus there is
no reason to create them.

> And my second problem still remains the same with release 2-0.0-rc1
> that the auth module doesn't contain the exported function which were
> there for challenging the Registering party (www_challenge, etc) at
> the time of Registration. Plz tell me if there is any other way to
> challenge the registering party in the new release or we're missing
> something?????? 

Yes function names were slightly changed, check ser-oob.cfg especially
route[REGISTRAR].

Michal

> 
> plz reply asap.... 
> 
> regds, 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Jiri Kuthan <jiri at iptel.org> 
> Sent by:
> serusers-bounces at lists.iptel.org 
> 
> 10/26/2007 10:20 AM 
> 
> 
>                To
> Piyush.Bansal at relianceada.com, serusers at lists.iptel.org, serdev at lists.iptel.org 
>                cc
> 
>           Subject
> Re: [Serusers]
> [Serdev] SER
> Release 2 Query..
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> At 14:49 26/10/2007, Piyush.Bansal at relianceada.com wrote:
> 
> >Hi All, 
> >
> >I want to use SER which works with TLS and MySql - 5.0.*+ both. I
> think that is there in Release 2.* of SER. 
> >
> >While testing with the CVS Release of SER dated 22/10/2007, we faced
> lot of problems, as there was no provision for sending challenge to
> the Calling Party at the time of Registration.. And there is no
> Provision to make subscriber and uri_db table at the time of creation
> of Data Base schema... 
> >
> >Has anybody used this release???? 
> 
> Which -- CVS/HEAD? That's work in massive progress, I would be
> surprised if someone was using it
> for other purposes than development. (heavy DB overhaul)
> 
> Otherwise 2.0 should be fine with respect to the points you are
> raising.
> 
> -jiri
> 
> >Plz tell me if there is anything to do with the configuration or
> what???? 
> >
> >plz reply me ASAP..... 
> >
> >thanx in advance.. 
> >
> >regds, 
> >
> >--Piyush Bansal 
> >_______________________________________________
> >Serdev mailing list
> >Serdev at lists.iptel.org
> >http://lists.iptel.org/mailman/listinfo/serdev
> 
> 
> 
> --
> Jiri Kuthan            http://iptel.org/~jiri/
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Serusers mailing list
> Serusers at lists.iptel.org
> http://lists.iptel.org/mailman/listinfo/serusers
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Serusers mailing list
> Serusers at lists.iptel.org
> http://lists.iptel.org/mailman/listinfo/serusers