Issue 2493 #2522
Issue 2493 #2522
Conversation
* master: Patch for Downloader support for TLSv1.1 and TLSv1.2 This close #2501 This close #RESTCOMM-1095 This close #RESTCOMM-1093 changed OS name Added fix for OSX mount issue removed unnesesary error log Update Restcomm - Docker Quick Start Guide.adoc Update Restcomm - Docker Quick Start Guide.adoc Update Restcomm - Docker Quick Start Guide.adoc change port 80 to 8080 manage the version of license-maven-plugin
* master: Docker RAM requirements and address matching 'SECURESSL' if condition rollback 'SECURESSL' if condition fixed :stable removed from supported tags Port mappings correction 'Docker Image in OSX host' removed
* master: update sip servlet build no
* master: (34 commits) IVR test fix fixed class casting errors in different classes moved Collected result to mscontrol.api and did proper translation in mediagroup, made IvrEndpointResponse to generic changed rvd url Recording issue fix "Gather" replaced with Verbs.gather Hints limits logic change Hints limits Rename local variable Added pr parameter to ASR Signal Fix for DTMF from MediaServer Fix for DTMF using SIP INFO added Timeouts description added all languages supported by google Added configuration for timeouts, fixed issue with languages in ASR Added unit tests Fix: Go to the next Verb after silent Minor changes to restcomm configuration script Ignore RCML from partialCallback Remove PartialCallback check. Add FinalResult tests ...
| allowOnlySuperAdmin(); | ||
|
|
||
| //Character verification | ||
| final Pattern pattern = Pattern.compile(SUB_DOMAIN_NAME_VALIDATION_PATTERN); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
ca nwe compile the patterns in intialization and reuse them?
| //Check if domain_name does not already taken inside restcomm by an organization. | ||
| Organization organization = organizationsDao.getOrganizationByDomainName(domainName); | ||
| if(organization != null){ | ||
| return status(CONFLICT) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
i guess this checking its just a preValidation, anc concurrent access is later checked in backend,right? otherwise i dont see how this will enforce a unique cosntraint if concurrent accessed...
There was a problem hiding this comment.
this line is not here to prevent concurrency but instead its here to intend to see if domain name is not already taken by another organization in restcomm DB.
p.s. domain name column is unique in organization table so DB concurrency is handled at DB level
| if(dnsProvisioningManager == null) { | ||
| logger.warn("No DNS provisioning Manager is configured, restcomm will not make any queries to DNS server."); | ||
| organization = new Organization(Sid.generate(Sid.Type.ORGANIZATION), domainName, DateTime.now(), DateTime.now(), Organization.Status.ACTIVE); | ||
| organizationsDao.addOrganization(organization); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
does it make sense to do this? what will be the impl of this DAO? shouldnt we send an error response.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
yes it does, this is to cover that restcomm that is not integrated with a DNS server can also create organization, for example a local deployment etc.
| }else { | ||
| //for example hosted zone id of domain restcomm.com or others. if not provided then default will be used as per configuration | ||
| String hostedZoneId = data.getFirst("HostedZoneId"); | ||
| if(dnsProvisioningManager.doesResourceRecordAlreadyExists(domainName, hostedZoneId)){ |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
again, is there any kind of backend transaction happening here? i didnt see any transaction at dao impl level, is this at amazon backend level? shouldnt we synchronize the conurrent acces to ensure this kind of unique constraints are safe?
Even if we use any local sync means,what will happen if the concurrent requests are processed in different cluster nodes?Is there any LB affinity per accoutn in place to ensure they will reach same cluster node?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This particular line is making sure if new domain name is available on dns/amazon-roue53 side
| } | ||
|
|
||
| @Path("/{domainName}") | ||
| @PUT |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
why post and put have same implementation?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
on this particular mentioned path both PUT and POST have same implementation i.e. used to create new organization. Later in next sprint we will add another POST method for updating organization
* master: Improved PUSH USSD API documentation use instance ip as fallback domain name
#2493
This PR also need to reviwed along side https://bitbucket.org/telestax/telscale-restcomm/pull-requests/37/issue-2493/diff