2 May
2016
2 May
'16
7:39 p.m.
Hi Max,
thanks for your patch.
On Mon, May 02, 2016 at 07:16:06PM +0200, msuraev(a)sysmocom.de wrote:
-struct gsm_subscriber *db_create_subscriber(const
char *imsi);
+struct gsm_subscriber *db_create_subscriber(const char *imsi, uint64_t smin,
+ uint64_t smax, bool ext);
I think 'ext' is not very expressive, let's call it 'alloc_ext',
'rand_ext' or something like that, indicating that the argument is about
allocation of a random extension number or not.
+enum gsm_subscr_ext {
Also here, please use 'gsm_subscr_ext_alloc_policy' to make it more
explicit about what it is.
+ uint64_t ext_min;
+ uint64_t ext_max;
pretty large numbers (uint64_t), considering that your VTY code
restricts them to five-digit numbers. That's not a problem, it can stay
that way, but just something that struck my mind. Maybe it makes sense
to allow longer/larger ranges in the VTY? Or is there something in the
code restricting it to 5 digits or a low numeric range?
Regards,
Harald
--
- Harald Welte <laforge(a)gnumonks.org> http://laforge.gnumonks.org/
============================================================================
"Privacy in residential applications is a desirable marketing option."
(ETSI EN 300 175-7 Ch. A6)