[SR-Users] Sending PUSH notification asynchronously

[Mickael Marrache]

Thanks, it works great!

 

From: Daniel-Constantin Mierla [mailto:miconda at gmail.com] 
Sent: Thursday, March 19, 2015 11:56 AM
To: Mickael Marrache; 'Kamailio (SER) - Users Mailing List'
Subject: Re: [SR-Users] Sending PUSH notification asynchronously

 

You can define as many rtimer processes as you want and tell them to execute
same route block, consuming from the same queue.

Cheers,
Daniel

On 19/03/15 09:39, Mickael Marrache wrote:

Thanks, it helps.

 

However, if I create a timer and specify mode to 1, I will only have one
extra process to send all PUSH notifications. Therefore, at some point, this
extra process will be continuously busy handling messages in the queue, and
the queue will grow over and over.

 

Is it possible to have a pool of timers fetching from the same message
queue?

 

From: Daniel-Constantin Mierla [mailto:miconda at gmail.com] 
Sent: Thursday, March 19, 2015 10:28 AM
To: Mickael Marrache; 'Kamailio (SER) - Users Mailing List'
Subject: Re: [SR-Users] Sending PUSH notification asynchronously

 

You can delegate to send of the push to a rtimer process using mqueue -- see
same presentation, the section about tweeting.

Cheers,
Daniel

On 19/03/15 09:14, Mickael Marrache wrote:

I already looked at your presentation, the PUSH is send synchronously.

 

What I'm trying to achieve is sending the PUSH asynchronously. So, when I
receive an incoming call and the callee has no registration, I would like to
suspend the transaction and then delegate PUSH sending to another process.

 

In your presentation, I see the following:

 

route[PUSHASYNC] {

if (!is_method("INVITE"))

return;

if(registered("location"))

return;

route(SENDPUSH);

if(!t_suspend()) {

xlog("failed suspending trasaction [$T(id_index):$T(id_label)]\n");

send_reply("501", "Unknown destination");

exit;

}

xdbg("suspended transaction [$T(id_index):$T(id_label)] $fU => $rU\n");

$sht(vtp=>join::$rU) = "" + $T(id_index) + ":" + $T(id_label);

xdbg("htale key value [$sht(vtp=>join::$rU)]\n");

exit;

}

 

The route block is not execute asynchronously since it is called by the
calling block using regular way (i.e. route(PUSHASYNC)). Therefore, all
these operations are executed by the same process which is a worker process.
I would like to delegate execution of all the route block to a separate
process (at least execution of the SENDPUSH route block).

 

Mickael

 

From: sr-users [mailto:sr-users-bounces at lists.sip-router.org] On Behalf Of
Daniel-Constantin Mierla
Sent: Thursday, March 19, 2015 10:04 AM
To: Kamailio (SER) - Users Mailing List
Subject: Re: [SR-Users] Sending PUSH notification asynchronously

 

Hello,

don't do explicit t_suspend() if you are calling the async_task_route()
because it is done internally.

I presented a way for async push notifications during the Kamailio World
Conference 2014, see:

  -
http://www.kamailio.org/events/2014-KamailioWorld/day2/26-Daniel-Constantin.
Mierla-Kamailio.cfg-Async.pdf

A video should be also on youtube.

Cheers,
Daniel

On 19/03/15 08:49, Mickael Marrache wrote:

Hi,

 

I'm trying to add PUSH support to my system using Kamailio.

 

When a call is received and the callee has no active registration, a PUSH is
sent to the callee endpoint. In order to send this PUSH, my proxy sends an
HTTP requests to another server that will send the PUSH.

 

So, my route block is as follows:

 

route[PUSH] {

        #Send PUSH notification using a custom module I wrote

 

        #Suspend transaction execution.

        t_on_failure("MANAGE_FAILURE");

        if(!t_suspend()) {

                send_reply("503", "Service Unavailable");

                exit;

        }

 

        $sht(push=>join::$rU) = "" + $T(id_index) + ":" + $T(id_label);

        exit;

}

 

I would like to execute this route block asynchronously (i.e. in a separate
process).

 

I tried using the async_task_route command, and I can see the route block is
execute in a separate process, however some stuffs are broken (e.g.
transaction timeout, failure route). So, I thought it may be related to the
fact asynchronous execution is implemented using t_suspend/t_continue and in
this case, t_suspend/t_continue would be called twice.

 

The important point is to make the interaction with the PUSH server
asynchronous.

 

Any idea?

 

Thanks,

Mickael








_______________________________________________
SIP Express Router (SER) and Kamailio (OpenSER) - sr-users mailing list
sr-users at lists.sip-router.org
http://lists.sip-router.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sr-users







-- 
Daniel-Constantin Mierla
http://twitter.com/#!/miconda <http://twitter.com/#%21/miconda>  -
http://www.linkedin.com/in/miconda
Kamailio World Conference, May 27-29, 2015
Berlin, Germany - http://www.kamailioworld.com






-- 
Daniel-Constantin Mierla
http://twitter.com/#!/miconda <http://twitter.com/#%21/miconda>  -
http://www.linkedin.com/in/miconda
Kamailio World Conference, May 27-29, 2015
Berlin, Germany - http://www.kamailioworld.com





-- 
Daniel-Constantin Mierla
http://twitter.com/#!/miconda - http://www.linkedin.com/in/miconda
Kamailio World Conference, May 27-29, 2015
Berlin, Germany - http://www.kamailioworld.com
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.sip-router.org/pipermail/sr-users/attachments/20150319/6baa0bfb/attachment.html>