-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 215
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Issue 2519 #2530
Issue 2519 #2530
Conversation
# Conflicts: # restcomm/restcomm.http/src/main/java/org/restcomm/connect/http/RecordingsEndpoint.java
…ord for MariaDB script. Issue #1551.
…teTadhackEnvironment
…Environment # Conflicts: # restcomm/restcomm.application/src/main/webapp/WEB-INF/data/hsql/restcomm.script # restcomm/restcomm.application/src/main/webapp/WEB-INF/scripts/mariadb/init.sql
# Conflicts: # restcomm/restcomm.application/src/main/webapp/WEB-INF/data/hsql/restcomm.script # restcomm/restcomm.application/src/main/webapp/WEB-INF/scripts/mariadb/init.sql # restcomm/restcomm.dao/src/main/java/org/restcomm/connect/dao/mybatis/MybatisRecordingsDao.java # restcomm/restcomm.interpreter/src/main/java/org/restcomm/connect/interpreter/BaseVoiceInterpreter.java
." This reverts commit 1e7fadb.
…cipant media session. Issue #1552.
…video conferencing RCMLs. Issue #1552.
…ns, tested s3 upload with this version and its working like a charm
…pooling, commented for now as agreed. Issue #2594
…_error Critical fix for making Geolocation API work with RC running on MySQL
build.xml will fetch RVD from github/releases instead of mobicents Refers #2598
…ation Addition of http-client configuration params for HTTP conn pooling
Remove port for Provider DID URI when SRV enabled.
added regreg in place of exact https port value
@@ -103,13 +104,18 @@ private Address contact(final Gateway gateway, final int expires) throws Servlet | |||
if (outboundInterface == null) | |||
outboundInterface = (SipURI) factory.createSipURI(null, address); | |||
final String user = gateway.getUserName(); | |||
String contactUser = new String (user); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
i think this "new String" is not strictly neccesary...
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
You are right, to be updated.
private static SipStackTool tool; | ||
private SipStack receiver; | ||
private SipPhone phone; | ||
final String deploymentUrl = "http://127.0.0.1:8080/restcomm/"; |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
maybe is a good time to refactor thsi test to support parallelization, see other test to check how it goes
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
updated to parallel test
final String userName = "august@127.0.0.1:5092"; | ||
isAuthorizationHasRightUserName = false; | ||
isRegisterRequestReceived = false; | ||
ExecutorService executorService = Executors.newSingleThreadExecutor(); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
any reason to do this async to the test thread, why dont ew simple set the Gateway,and then proceed with traffic assertions?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
we may need to declare those asserting flags as volatile if several threads are read/writing them..
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
As the time, copied pasted without evaluating.
I removed the parallel code and also removed the check variables, put direct assert at the point as we don't use thread any more.
} | ||
}); | ||
|
||
RestcommCallsTool.getInstance().setGateWay(deploymentUrl, adminAccountSid, adminAuthToken, "friendlyName", |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
should we asssert something on response, to ensure the response is as expected?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
As response is from simulator, then nothing to check there.
I changed the testcase name, then it's cleared about the target for the testcase.
I just need to check if username has host part, REGISTER can be sent out and the username in authentication header in REGISTER request is what we want.
|
||
String response = null; | ||
try { | ||
response = webResource.accept(MediaType.APPLICATION_XML).post(String.class, params); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
why are we using XML here, most of the testsuite is using JSON as response format to ease parsing later...
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
updated follow comment.
final String host = outboundInterface.getHost(); | ||
int port = outboundInterface.getPort(); | ||
if (port == -1) { | ||
port = outboundInterface().getPort(); | ||
} | ||
final StringBuilder buffer = new StringBuilder(); | ||
buffer.append("sip:").append(user).append("@").append(host).append(":").append(port); | ||
buffer.append("sip:").append(contactUser).append("@").append(host).append(":").append(port); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
would be great to create meaningful constants fro "@" and ":" is all over the place...
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
There is a lot of place where is using @ and : .
We need to create a common place to define all of these thing. It's would be great in another story for refactoring code.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
agree
… register header
…ct if it's already in 3. adding testcase for proxyManagerTest
PR for #2519