Hello,
On 10/25/10 6:25 PM, Iñaki Baz Castillo wrote:
Hi, I know that handling bflags outside of branch_route is not a good
idea. Anyhow I have a doubt:
1) In a normal route I set setbflag(i:1)
why are you using i:1? The parameter must be just 1.
, so the bflag will be set
for all the
On 10/25/10 6:35 PM, Iñaki Baz Castillo wrote:
2010/10/25 Daniel-Constantin Mierlamico...@gmail.com:
why are you using i:1? The parameter must be just 1.
Sorry, just a typo in the mail :)
, so the bflag will be set
for all the branches that could be generated for this incoming
2010/10/25 Daniel-Constantin Mierla mico...@gmail.com:
Looked in the code and I saw that only first branch inherits the branch
flags from main route, the other takes only the value from location records.
Ok, so better to be careful with this and use blfag just under branch_route :)
PS: Perhaps
2010/10/25 Daniel-Constantin Mierla mico...@gmail.com:
PS: Perhaps would it make sense a constrain so setbflag(),
isbflagset() and resetbflag() cannot be used in route and
failure_route anymore?
they are necessary in route to mark natted register
Right, but IMHO it would make more sense it
On 10/25/10 10:30 PM, Iñaki Baz Castillo wrote:
2010/10/25 Daniel-Constantin Mierlamico...@gmail.com:
PS: Perhaps would it make sense a constrain so setbflag(),
isbflagset() and resetbflag() cannot be used in route and
failure_route anymore?
they are necessary in route to mark natted
2010/10/25 Daniel-Constantin Mierla mico...@gmail.com:
Right, but IMHO it would make more sense it to be a flag and not a
bflag (as the registrar server is processing the incoming transaction
rather than generating an outgoing transaction). This is, the
registrar set a flag(NATTED) before
