Thanks Bogdan !
We're looking forward to 2.0 then. 

Regards, 

Thomas

Le 27 sept. 2010 à 18:49, Bogdan-Andrei Iancu a écrit :

> Thomas,
> 
> the transaction layer will not be mandatory...it will be visited, but 
> the routing logic may decide if transaction layer should be activated or 
> not for that request.
> 
> Regards,
> Bogdan
> 
> Thomas wrote:
>> Hi Bogdan, 
>> 
>> OpenSIPS 2.0 architecture sounds indeed appealing. The documentation reads 
>> that L0-L3 are mandatory, which means that Core module will always perform 
>> transaction management before dispatching incoming messages to the Routing 
>> Engine. Is my understanding correct ? 
>> 
>> Regards, 
>> 
>> Thomas
>> 
>> Le 27 sept. 2010 à 17:39, Bogdan-Andrei Iancu a écrit :
>> 
>> 
>>> Hi Thomas,
>>> 
>>> The idea of having a generic connector module (to be able to pass custom 
>>> info from a SIP message to an external app) was really appealing to me 
>>> several time. Something like SEAS - with the binary encoded format sent 
>>> to other app - but no so linked to the logic in weSIP (the external app)....
>>> 
>>> Anyhow, this will be automatically solved in opensips 2.0 where the 
>>> routing script itself is an external application:
>>> 
>>>         http://www.opensips.org/Development/NewDesignDescription#toc2
>>> 
>>> Regards,
>>> Bogdan
>>> 
>>> Thomas wrote:
>>> 
>>>>> I would be interested in whether what you are asking is possible to do 
>>>>> with SIP/UDP. The proxy would have to be able to monitor (or being 
>>>>> told about) the state of AS instances, and in case of failover, fix 
>>>>> IPs in signaling (like in NAT traversal). This could actually be done 
>>>>> on stateless lb proxy.
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>> Yes, IPs in signaling would be an issue then. I am not sure either that it 
>>>> is possible or even a good design option. The idea I had with a SEAS-like 
>>>> connector is to terminate the transport layer at OpenSIPS so that IP 
>>>> fixing is done the other way around i.e. by the application server (IP of 
>>>> OpenSIPS is used for Contact ... instead of internal IP). This would be 
>>>> similar to a SIP IPVS configuration I think. But as far as I understand 
>>>> now SEAS was not designed for this purpose and I would need to develop 
>>>> another OpenSIPS module, if it is possible to use OpenSIPS only for the 
>>>> transport layer.
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>> -- 
>>> Bogdan-Andrei Iancu
>>> OpenSIPS Bootcamp
>>> 15 - 19 November 2010, Edison, New Jersey, USA
>>> www.voice-system.ro
>>> 
>>> 
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Users mailing list
>>> [email protected]
>>> http://lists.opensips.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users
>>> 
>> 
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> Users mailing list
>> [email protected]
>> http://lists.opensips.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users
>> 
>> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> Bogdan-Andrei Iancu
> OpenSIPS Bootcamp
> 15 - 19 November 2010, Edison, New Jersey, USA
> www.voice-system.ro
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Users mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://lists.opensips.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users


_______________________________________________
Users mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.opensips.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users

Reply via email to