[OpenSIPS-Devel] [Kamailio-Devel] pua callback

[Schumann Sebastian]

OK, seems to work, thanks a lot.

For clarification: I publish the presence state from the script and pass as parameter the URI. For each user, I publish from the script should always be _only one_ presence state. This does not mean that I will not have another state of the same user, if he published differently (XCAP, SIP PUBLISH directly from client) but all info from the script should only be the latest available.

I assinged this:
/* Create ID for update requests */
publ.id.s = pres_uri.s;
publ.id.len = pres_uri.len;

publ.flag|= UPDATE_TYPE;
publ.source_flag|= SCRIPT_PUBLISH;

I understand it that I can use presence URI as ID, as there should be only one state from the user. The publ.flag means that he should update the state if he find any previous (Etag changes already successfully from .......1.0 to ......2.1 what I didn't have before) and the source_flag separates the "presence source". So if e.g. Klaus would use the same ID from his module, it would be threated separately. I do not need this information in the id. Example from Klaus' module (memcpy(publ->id.s, "DIALOG_PUBLISH.", 15); memcpy(publ->id.s+15, callid->s, callid->len);) The DIALOG_PUBLISH would in fact be not required mandatory for separation because the souce_flag is set.

Did I understand it correctly? I hope so, because I achieved what I want and hope not to have just "a lucky hack" caused by any misunderstanding :-)

Thanks.

Sebastian

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Anca Vamanu [mailto:anca at voice-system.ro] 
> Sent: Monday, 06. October 2008 19:00
> To: Klaus Darilion
> Cc: Schumann Sebastian; devel at lists.kamailio.org; 
> devel at lists.opensips.org
> Subject: Re: [OpenSIPS-Devel] [Kamailio-Devel] pua callback
> 
> Hi Sebastian,
> 
> As Klaus said, you should not keep the etag to ensure that 
> the state is updated, but provide the same id and pua module 
> will take care of that.
> If you however, do want get the etag or the expires from the 
> answer in your module, you have to register a callback in pua 
> module to be called when the reply for the message you 
> triggered is received.
> 
> For this, you have to register the callback in mod_init, as 
> it is done in modules/pua_mi/pua_mi.c file:
> 
>     if(pua.register_puacb(SCRIPT_PUBLISH, scr_publ_rpl_cback, 
> NULL)< 0)
>     {
>         LM_ERR("Could not register callback\n");
>         return -1;
>     }   
> where SCRIPT_PUBLISH should be a new type of source 
> generating messages, that has to be defined in pua module.
> And then define the scr_publ_rpl_callback which has the prototype:
> int scr_publ_rpl_cback( ua_pres_t* hentity, struct sip_msg* 
> reply); The first parameter is a structure with infos about 
> the presentity and the second is the reply message.
> 
> regards,
> Anca Vamanu
> 
> 
> Klaus Darilion wrote:
> > Hi Sebastian!
> >
> > In the presence_dialoginfo module I do not care about the etag. The 
> > pua module stores the etag itself and reuses it for further 
> presence requests.
> >
> > (I think it is based on the publ->id which should be constant for 
> > "in-dialog" requests. Further, the type must be set to the 
> update type:
> > publ->flag|= UPDATE_TYPE;)
> >
> > regards
> > klaus
> >
> > Schumann Sebastian schrieb:
> >   
> >> Dear all
> >>  
> >> I wrote a module using the pua module api to send presence 
> messages 
> >> directly from the script and it all works fine. I have 
> only problems 
> >> to use the ETag from the answer, I can somehow not process 
> the answer 
> >> at all. I tried to look at pua_mi and other pua modules but cannot 
> >> see any light there how to process the answer. I know pua callback 
> >> does it but do not know how, I am lost within the structures.
> >>  
> >> It is important though because otherwise if a publish is 
> sent and the 
> >> state is updated, there is no acutal update but two 
> presence states 
> >> from one client.
> >>  
> >> Can someone (Anca?) help me and provide some more info about the 
> >> proper use of PUA to process the answer and E-Tag 
> respectively properly?
> >>  
> >> Thanks a lot!
> >>  
> >> Sebastian
> >>
> >>
> >> 
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> >> ---
> >>
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> Devel mailing list
> >> Devel at lists.kamailio.org
> >> http://lists.kamailio.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/devel
> >>     
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Devel mailing list
> > Devel at lists.opensips.org
> > http://lists.opensips.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/devel
> >
> >   
> 
>