Attention is currently required from: daniel, laforge, lynxis lazus.

View Change

7 comments:

• File src/ss7_as_vty.c:

  • Patch Set #4, Line 269: "When receiving a TCAP Continue/End/Abort message where no ASP can be assosiated (either via session tracking or by TCAP range for dtid). How should this message handled.\n"

    "associated"
    "message handled" -> "message be handled".

  • Patch Set #4, Line 547: const char *tcap_unroutable_str = get_value_string_or_null(osmo_ss7_as_tcap_unroutable_vals,

    This only makes sense in SS7_AS_TCAP_UNROUTABLE_ROUTE_FALLBACK case afaiu, so better move this lookup inside the switch case.

• File src/tcap_as_loadshare.c:

  • Patch Set #3, Line 510: rc = -ENOKEY;

    this is quite ugly. […]

    Not sure what you mean.

• File src/tcap_as_loadshare.c:

  • Patch Set #4, Line 469: struct osmo_mtp_transfer_param new_mtp = {};

    since you are copying orig_mtp just below, there's no need to zero-initialize the struct here.

  • Patch Set #4, Line 478: /*! When a TCAP MSU from an ongoing session (TCAP != Begin) could not routed either by the TCAP session tracking or

    could not be routed.

  • Patch Set #4, Line 504: /* No ASP selection because the SCCP msg will be routed else where */

    elsewhere

  • Patch Set #4, Line 506: /* Message is handled and will be routed elsewhere */

    afaiu this comment is misleading, since case "rc" is actually an error and the message is not being routed?

To view, visit change 43008. To unsubscribe, or for help writing mail filters, visit settings.