Re: [OpenSIPStack] Server implementation question

[Thomas R. <tho...@it...>]

Ok thanks.

So it would only be worth looking into that if we wanted to use openSBC.

Now ... is there a way to use pre-existing classes to handle the SIPStackEv=
ents (without openSBC / B2BUA classes) or would I have to do that handling =
and timers,.. myself? (i.e. when I get a REGISTER event I don't really want=
 to have to worry myself about sending back TRYING and the www-auth handsha=
king,... I just want to check the credentials supplied against what's in ou=
r database..)

Regards,

-----Original Message-----
From: ope...@li... [mailto:opensipstack=
-de...@li...] On Behalf Of Joegen E. Baclor
Sent: Sonntag, 25. November 2007 00:29
To: ope...@li...
Subject: Re: [OpenSIPStack] Server implementation question

Thomas Raschbacher wrote:
> After looking into it a bit more it seems that B2BUA handles the proxy, r=
egistrar, .. stuff that we'd need .. so in your opinion is it worth spendin=
g more time looking into using B2BUA classes in favour of SIPStack or is th=
at a more-or-less pointless exercise?
>
> Thanks
>
>

I do not advise it.  The B2BUA is on top of the food chain.  If you
decide to change the B2BUA code, it will automatically make it harder
for you to upgrade to newer releases of OpenSIPStack.   The B2BUA has
various handlers.   B2B*Interface classes.   These handlers provide
hooks for application developer to customize the behavior of the B2BUA.
  If you need new handlers to be exposed, you may vote for such handlers
to be added but you need to justify why.  I will be happy to add them.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by: Microsoft
Defy all challenges. Microsoft(R) Visual Studio 2005.
http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/vse0120000070mrt/direct/01/
_______________________________________________
opensipstack-devel mailing list
ope...@li...
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/opensipstack-devel