[Users] UN-REGISTER

[Carsten Bock]

Hi Bogdan,

I guess your right. In my test-case i actually did only insert new 
contacts, i did not update any existing contacts; and that is why it 
worked as i thought it should.
I will set both parameters in my config, then everything should be happy.
Tomorrow i will look into the usrloc-source, to see if i can create a 
patch to move the functionality completely into the usrloc-module.

Thanks in advance,
Carsten

Bogdan-Andrei Iancu schrieb:
> Hi Carsten,
>
> well...things are not quite so simple.
>
> the "desc_time_order" in usrloc controls how the contacts are ordered 
> at insert time - when a new contact is received, it maybe inserted in 
> the contacts list (for the AOR record) based on q or time criteria.
>
> the "desc_time_order" in register controls the update process - when a 
> contact is updated,  it will be moved first if the option is enabled. 
> Initial insert is not affected at all.
>
> So, it looks like these parameters (from different modules) controls 
> different things:
>    usrloc - insert order
>    registrar - update order
>
> which IMHO doesn't look so consistent....What people what to achieve 
> is to have the contacts ordered either by q, either by modification 
> time (insert or update)...which means you have to set the param in 
> both modules....
>
> I think will make sense to remove the param from registrar module, but 
> to move it's functionality in usrloc module.
>
> regards,
> bogdan
>
> Carsten Bock wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> I've made a patch for the registrar module (and it's documentation) 
>> in order to remove this parameter (attached).
>> I suggest we should remove this parameter in the next version...
>>
>> Carsten
>>
>> Carsten Bock schrieb:
>>
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> After testing this, it works if you set the desc_time_order 
>>> Parameter in the usrloc module instead of in the registrar module. 
>>> Now it even works properly after restarting the proxy.
>>> I think, the desc_time_order Parameter should be removed from the 
>>> registrar module, since it does not work as described in the manual.
>>>
>>> Carsten
>>>
>>> Carsten Bock schrieb:
>>>
>>>> Hi,
>>>>
>>>> Actually i thought, this might be a good solution, but 
>>>> unfortunately it did not work out properly. What i found out was, 
>>>> that:
>>>>
>>>> a) The Contacts however are not sorted at startup => Upon reload 
>>>> not the newest one is used but the first one loaded.
>>>> b) The desc_time_order seems only to work with maximum two contacts 
>>>> per user (if the third contact gets updated, it seems like it is 
>>>> only pushed to the second entry and not to the first)
>>>>
>>>> Am i correct, that really the registrar module was meant? The 
>>>> usrloc module also has a parameter (desc_time_order, 
>>>> http://openser.org/docs/modules/1.1.x/usrloc.html#AEN219) and from 
>>>> my point of view it make more sense to have this functionality in 
>>>> usrloc more than in the registrar. I'll test this.
>>>>
>>>> Carsten
>>>>
>>>> Bogdan-Andrei Iancu schrieb:
>>>>
>>>>> of course there is contact timeout as each contact is registered 
>>>>> for a limited time period.
>>>>>
>>>>> a more elegant solution is to use the "desc_time_order" and 
>>>>> "append_branches" module parameter in order to retrieve from 
>>>>> usrloc only the latest contact. See:
>>>>>    http://openser.org/docs/modules/1.1.x/registrar.html
>>>>>
>>>>> regards,
>>>>> bogdan
>>>>
>