|Summary:||ASTERISK-03504: [patch] Allow register within [peer]|
|Reporter:||Olle Johansson (oej)||Labels:|
|Date Opened:||2005-02-13 15:17:27.000-0600||Date Closed:||2011-06-07 14:05:25|
|Environment:||Attachments:||( 0) peerregister.txt|
|Description:||* Allows register= with the same syntax within a peer|
* Also supports simplified syntax
* Adds "authuser" configuration to peer
Used in normal calls as well as for registration
* Lists peer name in "sip show registry"
Disclaimer on file
****** ADDITIONAL INFORMATION ******
Tested with some SIP services, but not heavily tested. Please test and add notes here.
|Comments:||By: Olle Johansson (oej) 2005-02-14 01:35:04.000-0600|
To make it clear: This is not ready for cvs, for testing only.
But please test!
By: Mark Spencer (markster) 2005-02-15 23:50:20.000-0600
I'm not sure I see why this is necessary given that you can do a register line and have @sipper on it... In what way is this superior?
By: Olle Johansson (oej) 2005-02-16 01:11:10.000-0600
This is only a beginning, when we have a clear connection between a registration and a peer we can simplify matching and the setting up of a service to a service provider. Today, it's too complicated to setup a connection to a SIP service provider like BroadVoice.
I just wanted to test this first step. I think it's a bit more logical to have the register within the [peer] section.
By: Kevin P. Fleming (kpfleming) 2005-02-16 09:45:19.000-0600
I agree; I'd like to see the register=> statements in the general section disappear, in favor of actually having them tied to the relevant peer that is going to be making/receiving the calls associated with that registration.
By: Mark Spencer (markster) 2005-03-01 00:33:53.000-0600
Should it not simply be "register => yes" ?
By: Kevin P. Fleming (kpfleming) 2005-03-01 01:05:13.000-0600
Hmmm... that could work, although we'd still have to have the ability to specify the SIP domain and extension to register as, since that's currently supported in the general section.
Maybe "yes" is enough to do a register with the default domain and no extension, and the "simple" domain/extension syntax would be an adequate method for that.
By: Olle Johansson (oej) 2005-03-01 01:08:52.000-0600
register=yes requires a setting for default extension, which is needed anyway, so I'll go ahead with that.
By: Olle Johansson (oej) 2005-03-16 13:17:22.000-0600
Will re-open when I have more time to finish this.