RE: [reSIProcate] DUM API question

["Derek MacDonald" <derek@xxxxxxxx>]

> > We currently create a usage in that case.  It could be argued that we
> > shouldn't, as it breaks the onNewSession/onTerminate symmetry.
> >
> > I'm going to add a SessionProgress handler which notifies the user of
> > DialogSet level session progress events, so we can have ringing for
> > non-dialog establishing 180s.
> >
> 
> Under what circumstances does a 1xx not establish a dialog? Do you mean
> the
> 100?

I also was thinking of 18x's w/out a contact(or a to tag for 3261).  Is this
correct Robert, or is there always an early dialog from a 18x?

> 
> > //called when a 100 or non-dialog-establishing 18x is received
> > for a request
> > virtual void onSessionSetProgress(AppDialogSetHandle, const
> > SipMessage&msg)=0;
> >
> > Instead of creating a usage to deliver the 6xx we could add another
> method
> > to the SessionProgressHandler.
> >
> > //call when a request fails w/out a dialog being established
> > virtual void onSessionSetupFailure(AppDialogSetHandle, const
> > SipMessage&msg)=0;
> >
> >
> > I'm okay with this or the Usage creation approach.  Get your votes in
> soon
> > to break the deadlock.
> 
> Currently, there is no requirement for the app writer to use the
> AppDialogSet at all. If we add this in, it will be mandatory for
> applications to implement it. Still could be the right way to go.
> 

A default implementation of AppDialogSet is provided, but any user who wants
to track what happens to a particular request will implement an
AppDialogSet, if only as an asynchronous completion token.

> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> resiprocate-devel mailing list
> resiprocate-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> https://list.sipfoundry.org/mailman/listinfo/resiprocate-devel