|Summary:||ASTERISK-10442: Settings in sip.conf are not processed|
|Date Opened:||2007-10-04 00:34:41||Date Closed:||2011-06-07 14:02:43|
1. SuSE 9.3, Kernel 2.6.11
2. Debian etch 4.0, Kernel 2.6.18
Asterisk version: 1.4.11
When I started with Asterisk I really lost some of my hair due to this problem. The result was that specific settings in sip.conf did not work and didn't show up in the debug files. It seemed they were ignored. I used the standard template
and left the comments in it as an help. To separate configuration from comments
I added all settings at the end of the comment section. The problem was, that
the settings like externhost, sipdebug etc. did not work. By chance I discovered that setting the sipdebug by activating it at the place where it was
commented out, it worked. So placing all settings at the beginning of the
comment section just after the [general] context solved the problem. This can
be easily reproduced by placing the properties directly at the end of the
comment section (for example sipdebug, externhost).
To me this looks like that properties are ignored depending on the position in
the config file.
|Comments:||By: Joshua C. Colp (jcolp) 2007-10-04 08:19:51|
This is indeed true, but it is documented which options work in what places. Users and peers have listings detailing what options are applicable to them. As for reporting options that aren't read in when put in the wrong place we can't exactly do that, as for type=friend this would cause options to reported as incorrect when in fact they were. If you have ideas on clarifying the documentation so others will not face this feel free to submit a patch. Peace!
By: buddybutterfly (buddybutterfly) 2007-10-04 08:52:42
thanks for the clarification. I am sorry but I do not totally agree. The following
listed config structures should be the same and should not lead to ignore
; lots of documentation and commented out settings
; as in the default template configuration
Both configurations should be working! I can not see the location in the
documentation that states that this is not working. Just by placing some
settings in the same context after comment blocks should not lead to errors.
Is this really intended?
By: Joshua C. Colp (jcolp) 2007-10-04 08:55:21
It does indeed work, I've just tested it. I think your issue is that there is an [authentication] header NOT commented out by default in the example configuration file. If you added the options after that, then it would not be part of [general] and would be ignored.