Re: [reSIProcate] Using DUM to perform an invite with non-SDP body
On 9/8/05, Alan Stokes <alan@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
>
> On 9/7/05, Jason Fischl <jason@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > As currently implemented, InviteSession and InviteSessionHandler are
> > very much tied to SDP and offer/answer exchanges. If you want to make
> > new session types that are based on different contents, you would be
> > best off deriving a new Session class from DialogUsage. and also
> > making up a new Handler class.
>
> One downside of this approach is that I can't do it without modifying the
> existing source code. (DialogUsageManager::makeNewSession
> is private, and also I see that DialogUsageManager makes *InviteSession a
> friend.) Is there any intention to make it easier to add new types of
> dialog? The coupling seems very tight at the moment.
>
Yes. This is a valid concern. There are no plans at the moment but you
could make some proposals. I think it is a good idea.
> BTW, I'm currently looking at the 0.9.0 tarball. I see that quite a lot has
> changed since then - a source code reorganisation amongst other things.
> Would I be better off getting the current tip, especially if I'm going to be
> modifying things? Is another tarball in the works at all?
Another tarball is coming but I still recommend that you work off the
main rather than the tarball.
>
> - Alan
>