Re: [OpenSIPS-Users] Implementation of RFC 8599

2024-02-05 Thread Volkan Oransoy
That is exactly what I was looking for :) Thank you Adrian. Volkan Oransoy On 5 Feb 2024 at 10:34 +, Adrian Georgescu , wrote: > You must register at least once, so that the server can collect the push > token. Then, later you just wait during the Invite for the devices to get the > push

Re: [OpenSIPS-Users] Implementation of RFC 8599

2024-02-05 Thread Adrian Georgescu
You must register at least once, so that the server can collect the push token. Then, later you just wait during the Invite for the devices to get the push with t_wait_for_new_branches(). When any device registers again, you will get notified and can add a new branch to fork to. Msilo has no

Re: [OpenSIPS-Users] Implementation of RFC 8599

2024-02-05 Thread Volkan Oransoy
Hi Adrian Thanks for your comment. I got your point. Can you give a hint to handle the the call forking for freshly registered devices? I need to keep calls in a queue until the UA registers. Is msilo right approach? Thanks Volkan Oransoy On 5 Feb 2024 at 10:02 +, Adrian Georgescu ,

Re: [OpenSIPS-Users] Implementation of RFC 8599

2024-02-05 Thread Adrian Georgescu
You should fork to any registered contact and send push and later fork to any new devices that registered before a predefined timeout. The only flaw with this logic is that there is jo real progress indicator in SIP, you only know a push was sent but not the SIP device status like 180 Ringing,

Re: [OpenSIPS-Users] Implementation of RFC 8599

2024-02-05 Thread Volkan Oransoy
Yes they are but the implementation looks for a valid registration record to initiate pn. The route snippet at the blog post looks for the pn enabled registrations with return code 2 then pops up the E_UL_CONTACT_REFRESH event, and waits for a registration from the UA to proxy the call. # do

Re: [OpenSIPS-Users] Implementation of RFC 8599

2024-02-04 Thread Adrian Georgescu
Push notifications were designed exactly for the case when the UA is not registered. — Adrian > On 3 Feb 2024, at 09:19, Volkan Oransoy wrote: > > Hi there > > @Ronald we use that tool for notification tests and it does the job. >

Re: [OpenSIPS-Users] Implementation of RFC 8599

2024-02-03 Thread Volkan Oransoy
Hi there @Ronald we use that tool for notification tests and it does the job. https://github.com/flutter-webrtc/callkeep/tree/master/tools We managed to work the setup mentioned at the official blog post but that requires the UA to stay registered. This needs periodic communication between the

Re: [OpenSIPS-Users] Implementation of RFC 8599

2024-02-02 Thread rvg
Hi Volkan, I implemented the scripting from  sip-push-notification-with-opensips-3-1-lts-rfc-8599-supportpart-ii/ in opensips 3.4.0. As the send pn to apple or googlei s not defined I fail to get the parameters passed to the send pn to apns script which I also have. I seem to have lost the

Re: [OpenSIPS-Users] Implementation of RFC 8599

2024-02-02 Thread johan
send a query directly to apple or to google for waking them up. I did something like that in an external lua script. On 2/02/2024 09:49, Volkan Oransoy wrote: Hi all, I am working on implementing RFC 8599 and have an architectural question. I followed the blog post

[OpenSIPS-Users] Implementation of RFC 8599

2024-02-02 Thread Volkan Oransoy
Hi all, I am working on implementing RFC 8599 and have an architectural question. I followed the blog post https://blog.opensips.org/2020/06/03/sip-push-notification-with-opensips-3-1-lts-rfc-8599-supportpart-ii/ and it works. Based on the rfc and the implementation of Opensips, the UA should