[asterisk-dev] [Code Review] Gently reduce masquerade insanity

[rmudgett]

-----------------------------------------------------------
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviewboard.asterisk.org/r/2266/#review7652
-----------------------------------------------------------

Ship it!


Ok to ship.  I think the note should be added though.


/trunk/main/channel.c
<https://reviewboard.asterisk.org/r/2266/#comment14558>

    I think you should add a note that the uniqueid's must be swapped before the channels are renamed.


- rmudgett


On Jan. 10, 2013, 11:09 a.m., David Lee wrote:
> 
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
> https://reviewboard.asterisk.org/r/2266/
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> 
> (Updated Jan. 10, 2013, 11:09 a.m.)
> 
> 
> Review request for Asterisk Developers.
> 
> 
> Summary
> -------
> 
> Masquerades are an insane implementation detail within Asterisk. It generates
> a number of useless and confusing events, and manipulates channels in a way
> that semantically doesn't make sense. I've given a fairly thorough review of
> masquerade code and its usage on the wiki at
> https://wiki.asterisk.org/wiki/x/IwBRAQ.
> 
> While ultimately it makes the most sense to abandon masquerades altogether,
> it will take some time to completely irradicate. Even then, there may always
> be code that's not worth rewriting to get rid of the masquerade.
> 
> This patch does two things to make masquerades slightly less insane:
>  * When swapping the names of the original and clone channel, only emit a
>    single rename event of original -> original<ZOMBIE>. The original code
>    issued three rename events to accomplish the same end.
>  * In addition to swapping the names of the channels, also swap their
>    uniqueid's. This allows the 'Uniqueid' field to be used as a stable
>    identifier for a channel from and external interface, such as AMI.
> 
> 
> Diffs
> -----
> 
>   /trunk/UPGRADE.txt 378909 
>   /trunk/include/asterisk/manager.h 378909 
>   /trunk/main/channel.c 378909 
> 
> Diff: https://reviewboard.asterisk.org/r/2266/diff
> 
> 
> Testing
> -------
> 
> I've run a few SIP transfers and parking scenarios. AMI masquerade events seem
> reasonable, and the Uniqueid and Linkedid fields in CELs made more sense.
> 
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> David
> 
>

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.digium.com/pipermail/asterisk-dev/attachments/20130110/2c36b51c/attachment.htm>