Re: [reSIProcate] ClientAuthManager & supporting different authentication schemes
On 9/13/05, Alan Stokes <alan@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Another thing I need to do is support a non-Digest authentication scheme on
> the client side.
>
> It looks like I need to produce an alternative implementation of
> ClientAuthManager for that - but unfortunately it hasn't got any virtuals I
> can override. It looks to me like it needs a virtual destructor and that
> handle, addAuthentication and probably dialogSetDestroyed need to be
> virtual.
>
We need to do some refactoring of ClientAuthManager and add some
virtual functions. Do you want to take a shot at this. I will help -
but don't have the time to actually do the work.
> Is that right, or am I missing something? Would you normally declare a
> separate abstract base class for the interface and make ClientAuthManager
> implement it, or are you happy combining the interface with the base
> implementation? If this is the right thing to do, would you be interested in
> a patch?
>
> - Alan
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> resiprocate-devel mailing list
> resiprocate-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> https://list.sipfoundry.org/mailman/listinfo/resiprocate-devel
>
>