Re: [SR-Users] Does t_newtran() behave different than in Kamailio 1.5?

2011-05-17 Thread Henning Westerholt
On Monday 16 May 2011, Daniel-Constantin Mierla wrote: > > function call will not be saved into transaction!!! > > > > However in 3.X TM documentation such note is not present: > >http://kamailio.org/docs/modules/devel/modules/tm.html#t_newtran > > > > So, does 3.X behave different and change

Re: [SR-Users] Does t_newtran() behave different than in Kamailio 1.5?

2011-05-16 Thread Iñaki Baz Castillo
2011/5/16 Daniel-Constantin Mierla : >> Ok, I didn't know that t_save_lumps also saves AVP's. That's good. > > no, it does not save the avps. But there should be the same avp list used no > matter the transaction is already created or not. In other words, when the > transaction is createed, the ac

Re: [SR-Users] Does t_newtran() behave different than in Kamailio 1.5?

2011-05-16 Thread Daniel-Constantin Mierla
On 5/16/11 3:38 PM, Iñaki Baz Castillo wrote: 2011/5/16 Daniel-Constantin Mierla: The 3.x provides a way to save the changes done to message after t_newtrans() to transaction: http://kamailio.org/docs/modules/3.1.x/modules/tm.html#t_save_lumps Regarding avps, the same list should be used afte

Re: [SR-Users] Does t_newtran() behave different than in Kamailio 1.5?

2011-05-16 Thread Iñaki Baz Castillo
2011/5/16 Daniel-Constantin Mierla : > The 3.x provides a way to save the changes done to message after > t_newtrans() to transaction: > http://kamailio.org/docs/modules/3.1.x/modules/tm.html#t_save_lumps > > Regarding avps, the same list should be used after creating the transaction, > so new avps

Re: [SR-Users] Does t_newtran() behave different than in Kamailio 1.5?

2011-05-16 Thread Daniel-Constantin Mierla
Hello, On 5/16/11 3:22 PM, Iñaki Baz Castillo wrote: 2011/5/16 Daniel-Constantin Mierla: no, it should behave the same in 3.x. The behavior was there before openser forked from ser, but probably the documentation was updated in the openser branch over the time and then with the migration to tm

Re: [SR-Users] Does t_newtran() behave different than in Kamailio 1.5?

2011-05-16 Thread Henning Westerholt
On Monday 16 May 2011, Daniel-Constantin Mierla wrote: > > So, does 3.X behave different and changes after t_newtran are added to > > the transaction or not? > > no, it should behave the same in 3.x. The behavior was there before > openser forked from ser, but probably the documentation was update

Re: [SR-Users] Does t_newtran() behave different than in Kamailio 1.5?

2011-05-16 Thread Iñaki Baz Castillo
2011/5/16 Daniel-Constantin Mierla : > no, it should behave the same in 3.x. The behavior was there before openser > forked from ser, but probably the documentation was updated in the openser > branch over the time and then with the migration to tm from ser 2.0 was > lost. Thanks for the response.

Re: [SR-Users] Does t_newtran() behave different than in Kamailio 1.5?

2011-05-16 Thread Daniel-Constantin Mierla
Hello, On 5/16/11 2:49 PM, Iñaki Baz Castillo wrote: Hi, as Kamailio 1.5 TM documentation states, changes to transaction (adding headers, filling AVP's and so) after calling t_newtran() are not saved into the transaction: http://kamailio.org/docs/modules/1.5.x/tm.html#id2510920 NOTE that

[SR-Users] Does t_newtran() behave different than in Kamailio 1.5?

2011-05-16 Thread Iñaki Baz Castillo
Hi, as Kamailio 1.5 TM documentation states, changes to transaction (adding headers, filling AVP's and so) after calling t_newtran() are not saved into the transaction: http://kamailio.org/docs/modules/1.5.x/tm.html#id2510920 NOTE that the changes on the request that are made after this funct