Hello Dan,
I am still using this module in deployments with registrars that does
not support the path extension.
Regards,
Ovidiu Sas
On Thu, Jun 19, 2008 at 7:12 PM, Dan Pascu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> IMO, this whole module should be obsoleted and removed in 1.5. I think it
> can receive t
On Thursday 19 June 2008, Dan Pascu wrote:
> On Friday 06 June 2008, Ruud Klaver wrote:
> > On 05 Jun 2008, at 19:36, Dan Pascu wrote:
> > > Please check that if there is no DNS resolver available when the
> > > relay starts, if it blocks (related to that bug report where the
> > > openser mediapro
IMO, this is a bug fix, more than a new feature and it should be applied
to 1.4 before released. We had similar problems in the past with loading
usrloc contacts and was fixed in a similar manner.
Not being able to load more than 300 dialogs at startup is a serious bug
not a missing feature.
IMO, this whole module should be obsoleted and removed in 1.5. I think it
can receive the status of obsolete even by now to indicate that it will
be removed in the next version.
On Thursday 12 June 2008, Henning Westerholt wrote:
> Revision: 4390
> http://openser.svn.sourceforge.net/o
On Wednesday 11 June 2008, Bogdan-Andrei Iancu wrote:
> regarding client_nat_test - the nat test is also based on SDP IP, which
> is can be provided via MI, so , it can be private (integration with
> some AS).
I did not include the SDP checking functionality in this function (this is
the only thi
What is the current status of svn?
- still original froze in place
- unfrozen
- unfrozen and then frozen again
--
Dan
___
Devel mailing list
Devel@lists.openser.org
http://lists.openser.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/devel
On Tuesday 10 June 2008, Bogdan-Andrei Iancu wrote:
> Hi Juha,
>
> This is fine with me - should we split new modules versus design and
> arch changes? or keep them together under the same umbrella ?
I would keep new modules separate. They do not affect other developers, so
I see no point in cons
On Monday 09 June 2008, Bogdan-Andrei Iancu wrote:
> Hi,
>
> In the last days, there was an obvious need for more strict rules to
> control the process of preparing new release.
It is one of the common myths that more strict rules provide better
control over the unexpected or even the expected. I
Documentation item #1998130, was opened at 2008-06-19 14:04
Message generated for change (Comment added) made by apidruchny
You can respond by visiting:
https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=782960&aid=1998130&group_id=139143
Please note that this message will contain a full copy of t
Hi everybody!
Just a quick note that a new stable version 1.1 of RTPproxy has been
released. The new release includes performance enhancements and several
new features. It's available immediately at http://www.rtpproxy.org.
Detailed release notes are here:
http://www.b2bua.org/wiki/RTPproxy/RE
On Monday 09 June 2008, Pavel Kuzin wrote:
> Hi All!
>
> Trying to test configuration with 2 mediaproxyes on one host with
> multihomed.
>
> 1. ip 192.168.39.XX
> 2 ip 91.151.XX.XX
>
> modparam("mediaproxy", "media_relay_avp", "$avp(s:media_relay)")
> Is this wirking with current trunk?
Normally
On Friday 06 June 2008, Ruud Klaver wrote:
> On 05 Jun 2008, at 19:36, Dan Pascu wrote:
> > Please check that if there is no DNS resolver available when the
> > relay starts, if it blocks (related to that bug report where the
> > openser mediaproxy module did timeout and disconnected).
> >
> > --
>
On Friday 06 June 2008, Bogdan-Andrei Iancu wrote:
> Hi Henning,
>
> From volume of writing, probably having a block-list instead of
> allow-list will be more efficient.
I doubt it. Overall I thing they balance themselves out, as there are many
functions that only work in 1 or 2 routes.
Besides
On Friday 06 June 2008, Henning Westerholt wrote:
> Hi Bogdan,
>
> i don't think that this method of marking each module function with the
> proper flags for every special route scale. Perhaps it makes sense to
> think a little bit about this, perhaps there exist a better way..
>
> Are there any ob
Documentation item #1998130, was opened at 2008-06-19 14:04
Message generated for change (Comment added) made by osas
You can respond by visiting:
https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=782960&aid=1998130&group_id=139143
Please note that this message will contain a full copy of the com
Documentation item #1998130, was opened at 2008-06-19 14:04
Message generated for change (Tracker Item Submitted) made by Item Submitter
You can respond by visiting:
https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=782960&aid=1998130&group_id=139143
Please note that this message will contain a f
Documentation item #1998113, was opened at 2008-06-19 13:51
Message generated for change (Settings changed) made by apidruchny
You can respond by visiting:
https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=782960&aid=1998113&group_id=139143
Please note that this message will contain a full copy o
Documentation item #1998113, was opened at 2008-06-19 13:51
Message generated for change (Tracker Item Submitted) made by Item Submitter
You can respond by visiting:
https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=782960&aid=1998113&group_id=139143
Please note that this message will contain a f
Bugs item #1996441, was opened at 2008-06-17 16:26
Message generated for change (Comment added) made by apidruchny
You can respond by visiting:
https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=743020&aid=1996441&group_id=139143
Please note that this message will contain a full copy of the commen
On Thursday 19 June 2008, Klaus Darilion wrote:
> Hi Dan!
>
> Dan Pascu schrieb:
> ...
>
> > operators do not work in all cases? What about the TLS implementation
> > which is practically useless for end user devices, and even for proxy
> > to proxy connections can render your proxy completely unre
Patches item #1998043, was opened at 2008-06-19 16:24
Message generated for change (Comment added) made by carstenbock
You can respond by visiting:
https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=743022&aid=1998043&group_id=139143
Please note that this message will contain a full copy of the co
Patches item #1998043, was opened at 2008-06-19 16:24
Message generated for change (Tracker Item Submitted) made by Item Submitter
You can respond by visiting:
https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=743022&aid=1998043&group_id=139143
Please note that this message will contain a full co
Hi Dan!
Dan Pascu schrieb:
...
> operators do not work in all cases? What about the TLS implementation
> which is practically useless for end user devices, and even for proxy to
> proxy connections can render your proxy completely unresponsive under
> certain conditions?
Are you referring to
El Thursday 19 June 2008 16:52:51 Lucio Maciel escribió:
> Hi,
>
> This is offtopic, but maybe someone could help me.
Maybe, but please, use the OpenSer-user maillist at least, no the devel
maillist ;)
--
Iñaki Baz Castillo
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
___
Dev
Hi,
This is offtopic, but maybe someone could help me.
I have a problem with a costumer sending the DTMF via RTPEvent.
They are sending just one packet per event, with the END bit set and the
duration of the event, but some carriers are no recognizing this Event,
only if you keep sending rtp eve
On Thursday 12 June 2008, Henning Westerholt wrote:
> So i've came to the same conclusion like Juha. Its better to revert the
> commits that were done so far, upload the patch to the tracker, and
> continue with the developing after the release. People that really need
> this feature probably maint
26 matches
Mail list logo
