[OpenSIPS-Devel] pres_rules: Does presence_xml uses "sphere" element?

[Iñaki Baz Castillo]

2009/7/15 Anca Vamanu <anca at opensips.org>:
> Hi Inaki,
>
> Yes there is a sphere implementation in Opensips PA but it is not maybe the
> "most" correct one. If a sphere condition is encountered, the PA searches in
> the most recent published body for a sphere definition. If one is found,
> then it is evaluated if it matches the one in the condition.

ok

> If no sphere
> definition is found then the condition is evaluated as true.

This is incorrect (IMHO) and explains some strange issues I've detected.
For example, EyeBeam uses a custom pres-rules document which also
includes rules for IM and call (and of course also por presence).
Theorically pres-rules is just for presence.

Fortunatelly, the "rules" for IM and call authorization sent by
EyeBeam includes a sphere which custom values as "im_whitelist",
"call_whitelist" and so. Since nobody (neither EyeBeam) publishes a
presence document containing "sphere" value, this means that the rules
for IM and calls will *never* match and the PA should *ignore* them.
In this way, a user allowed for IM but not for presence wouldn't be
matched as "allowed" by OpenSIPS PA.

I know that EyeBeam makes a "custom" usage of pres-rules document, but
it *is* RFC compliant: the "custom" rules (for IM and calls) include a
never matched "sphere" so PA should never match them.


> I see now that this does not respect the RFC which says that the sphere must
> be searched in all bodies.

Note also that sphere can have multiple values separated by space.



-- 
Iñaki Baz Castillo
<ibc at aliax.net>