Re: [PATCH] dlr_mem.c & dlr_sdb.c check for dst

On Friday 02 April 2004 10:15, Nicholas Rahn wrote:
> On Thu, 2004-04-01 at 16:23, Alexander Malysh wrote:
> > > Anyway, wouldn't be better to normalize destination taken from dlr
> > > body?
> >
> > nope: (1) too much configuration; (2) why should we do it, when we have a
> > way to avoid user intervention?
>
> In the end, either way is ok for me.  however, i kind of think it makes
> more sense to normalize the destination number in the dlr_find method.
> that way the same normalization process (unified_prefix) is used for all
> phone numbers everywhere.  we don't then have a special way of treating
> the phone number just for dlrs (also then being able to use the less
> costly "=" rather than "like" in the SQL).   and it doesn't require any
> configuration or user intervention beyond what the user would normally
> do for his MO/MT messages.

1) how want you guess a unified prefix in dlr_find when user has not supplied 
unified prefix in the config file? (and that means user intervention).
2) we should do this magic only because we want to find our dlr entry in the 
DB, after this we have destination number equal supplied by user (see 
dlr_find:398)


>
> any comments?
> nick

-- 
Best regards / Mit besten Grüßen aus Düsseldorf

Dipl.-Ing.
Alexander Malysh
___________________________________________

Centrium GmbH
Vogelsanger Weg 80
40470 Düsseldorf

Fon: +49 (0211) 74 84 51 80
Fax: +49 (0211) 277 49 109

email: [email protected]
web: www.centrium.de
msn: [email protected]
icq: 98063111
___________________________________________

Please avoid sending me Word, Excel or PowerPoint attachments.
See http://www.fsf.org/philosophy/no-word-attachments.html