Skip to content
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

Registration fix #130

Merged
merged 2 commits into from
Oct 16, 2018
Merged

Registration fix #130

merged 2 commits into from
Oct 16, 2018

Conversation

Jane-Fan
Copy link

This pull request cherry pick the sip auth fix from #125 since it is needed for our testing.
The unit test is added to verify the expected digest response.

@codecov-io
Copy link

codecov-io commented Sep 12, 2018

Codecov Report

Merging #130 into master will increase coverage by 0.31%.
The diff coverage is 73.91%.

Impacted file tree graph

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##           master     #130      +/-   ##
==========================================
+ Coverage   72.46%   72.77%   +0.31%     
==========================================
  Files          15       15              
  Lines        1551     1554       +3     
  Branches      268      266       -2     
==========================================
+ Hits         1124     1131       +7     
+ Misses        315      314       -1     
+ Partials      112      109       -3
Impacted Files Coverage Δ
aiosip/auth.py 78.51% <73.91%> (+3.93%) ⬆️

Continue to review full report at Codecov.

Legend - Click here to learn more
Δ = absolute <relative> (impact), ø = not affected, ? = missing data
Powered by Codecov. Last update e62e996...a72237d. Read the comment docs.

Copy link
Contributor

@ovv ovv left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Looks almost good to me. If @vodik doesn't have any comment we can merge once the typo in the test if fiexd


def test_without_qop():
authenticate = auth.Auth.from_authenticate_header(
AUTH['auth_with_qop'],
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

you probably meant auth_without_qop here

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Yeah, and the test suddenly starts failing. Investigating.

@vodik
Copy link
Contributor

vodik commented Oct 16, 2018

I'm just going to quickly tweak this and get it merged upstream. I want to change the stringy handling of authentication schemes to use an enum.

This currently won't crash when we see an unsupported authentication scheme, which was part of the problem in the first place. If it has crashed then, we would have been able to fix this a lot faster.

jfan666 and others added 2 commits October 16, 2018 15:56
Use enumerations for specifying authentication support. This will
quickly throw a value error should we hit an unknown authentication
scheme instead of falling back on default behaviours that might not be
correct.

Always throw a key error if part of the authentication header is
missing, instead of defaulting to None or empty strings. This should
also help quickly catch errors if we send out invalid authentication
headers.
Copy link
Contributor

@vodik vodik left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I'm happy with this. I'll merge this tonight unless you guys got anything more to complain about. Then I'll start looking at getting back to my dialog work.

@vodik vodik merged commit 3279d70 into Eyepea:master Oct 16, 2018
@ovv
Copy link
Contributor

ovv commented Oct 16, 2018

@vodik I'm glad to see you are back & I hope everything is ok.

Just to let you know what we have been up to, I recently took a bit of time to work on the client to imagine and test an API that would work nicely. You can find that there (https://github.com/Eyepea/aiosip/compare/client) . It breaks a lot of things since I only wanted to experiment but it might be interesting for your dialog work. The test.py file contains a working example

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

5 participants