[OpenSER-Users] presence module dialog handling

[Sigrid Thijs]

Hi,

Sigrid Thijs wrote:

> 
> But, when there's an active subscription, and the presentity changes the 
> subscription handling from 'polite-block' to 'allow', the watcher only 
> receives one NOTIFY, containing the current presence description of the 
> presentity, but no further presence updates => not OK.
> 
> This also happens when the subscription-handling switches from 'allow' 
> to 'confirm' back to 'allow'. But this is probably not a real world example.
> 

Did you get a chance to look into these two issues?

kind regards,

Sigrid

> 
> 
> Anca Vamanu wrote:
>> Hi Sigrid,
>>
>> I tested myself and you were right. Please update again and test.
>>
>> Thanks and regards,
>> Anca
>>
>> Sigrid Thijs wrote:
>>> Unfortunately I jumped to conclusions to quickly. The NOTIFY requests 
>>> are not sent anymore when the watcher is "polite-block"-ed, but now 
>>> they are also not sent anymore to watchers that are allowed. An 
>>> allowed watcher only receives the correct presence state of the 
>>> presentity when he initiates the subscription.
>>>
>>> kind regards,
>>>
>>> Sigrid
>>>
>>>
>>> Sigrid Thijs wrote:
>>>> Thanks, that fixed it.
>>>>
>>>> kind regards,
>>>>
>>>> Sigrid
>>>>
>>>> Anca Vamanu wrote:
>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>
>>>>> I have just committed a fix. Could you please update to the svn 
>>>>> version of presence module. Or take the patch from here
>>>>> http://openser.svn.sourceforge.net/viewvc/openser/branches/1.3/modules/presence/notify.c?r1=4265&r2=4264&view=patch&pathrev=4265 
>>>>> <http://openser.svn.sourceforge.net/viewvc/openser/branches/1.3/modules/presence/notify.c?r1=4265&r2=4264&view=patch&pathrev=4265> 
>>>>>
>>>>> and apply it manually and reply if it works.
>>>>>
>>>>> regards,
>>>>> Anca Vamanu
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Sigrid Thijs wrote:
>>>>>> Anca Vamanu wrote:
>>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I know it is useless but this is what the RFC says: a successful 
>>>>>>> Subscribe must be followed by a Notify with the presence 
>>>>>>> state(none in this case).
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> But in this case, no SUBSCRIBE is sent by the watcher. The 
>>>>>> presentity changes his presence (which issues a PUBLISH), and the 
>>>>>> presence module sends notifications on all active watcher dialogs. 
>>>>>> Also those that are 'polite-block'-ed (who receive always a NOTIFY 
>>>>>> with the same content). I'm not saying it's wrong, it's just one 
>>>>>> thing we noticed.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> kind regards,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Sigrid
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> regards,
>>>>>>> Anca
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Sigrid Thijs wrote:
>>>>>>>> Just a remark: one more thing we noticed is that when a 
>>>>>>>> presentity has 'polite-block'ed  a watcher, the presence module 
>>>>>>>> sends a NOTIFY to the watcher each time the presentity changes 
>>>>>>>> his presence, although the content of the NOTIFY stays the same 
>>>>>>>> (no body).
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> kind regards,
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Sigrid
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Sigrid Thijs wrote:
>>>>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> we've installed version 1.3.2 and it works now.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Sigrid
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Anca Vamanu wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> I have fixed it now. Please update, test and reply if it works.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> regards,
>>>>>>>>>> Anca Vamanu
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Sigrid Thijs wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Sigrid Thijs wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> But now we noticed another problem. When the subscription 
>>>>>>>>>>>> handling is set to "polite-block", a NOTIFY should be sent 
>>>>>>>>>>>> containing a presence document that indicates that the 
>>>>>>>>>>>> presentity is unavailable. But the presence module sends a 
>>>>>>>>>>>> NOTIFY containing a presence description with the current 
>>>>>>>>>>>> presence state of the presentity. So there's no difference 
>>>>>>>>>>>> between setting the subscription handling to "allow" and 
>>>>>>>>>>>> "polite-block".
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> did you get any chance to take a look at this issue?
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> kind regards,
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Sigrid
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> kind regards,
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Sigrid
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> As a note, unless you are using more that one presence 
>>>>>>>>>>>>> servers, the fallback to db mode is not really needed and 
>>>>>>>>>>>>> inefficient.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks and regards,
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Anca Vamanu
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Sigrid Thijs wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> we've configured OpenSER 1.3.0 on a FreeBSD server, 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> together with OpenXCAP 0.9.9.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> When testing presence rules (RFC 5025) with our UA, we 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> noticed the following behavior:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> - Subscription Handling is set to "block" in the presence 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> rules:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> When a watcher subscribes for presence, it receives a 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> NOTIFY with the Subscription-State set to 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "terminated;reason=rejected". This is as expected.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> When the presentity changes it's presence, the watcher 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> doesn't receive any NOTIFY requests with the presence 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> update (also OK).
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> But, when the presentity changes the subscription handling 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to "allow" in the presence-rules document, the server sends 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> an in-dialog NOTIFY request on the subscription dialog that 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> was previously terminated. This is not ok. See the attached 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> file presence_rules_01.txt.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> - Subscription Handling is set to "allow" in the presence 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> rules:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> When the presentity changes the subscription handling to 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "block" in the presence-rules document, the server sends a 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> NOTIFY with the Subscription-State set to 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "terminated;reason=timeout" to the watchers.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> When the presentity changes his presence, the presence 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> server will still send NOTIFY requests to the watchers.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> See the attached file presence_rules_02.txt.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> kind regards,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Sigrid
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------ 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Users mailing list
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Users at lists.openser.org
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> http://lists.openser.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users
>>>>>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>>>>>>> Users mailing list
>>>>>>>>>>>> Users at lists.openser.org
>>>>>>>>>>>> http://lists.openser.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>>>> Users mailing list
>>>>>>>>> Users at lists.openser.org
>>>>>>>>> http://lists.openser.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users
>>>>>>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Users mailing list
>>>> Users at lists.openser.org
>>>> http://lists.openser.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users
>>>>
>>
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Users mailing list
> Users at lists.openser.org
> http://lists.openser.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users
>