Adding ability to generate predictable room names#1426
Open
alexlivekit wants to merge 5 commits intomainfrom
Open
Adding ability to generate predictable room names#1426alexlivekit wants to merge 5 commits intomainfrom
alexlivekit wants to merge 5 commits intomainfrom
Conversation
🦋 Changeset detectedLatest commit: 90432be The changes in this PR will be included in the next version bump. Not sure what this means? Click here to learn what changesets are. Click here if you're a maintainer who wants to add another changeset to this PR 💥 An error occurred when fetching the changed packages and changesets in this PR |
hechen-eng
reviewed
Feb 23, 2026
sip/sip.go
Outdated
| if !predictableRoomName { | ||
| suffix = guid.New("") | ||
| } | ||
| room = fmt.Sprintf("%s_%s_%s", pref, from, suffix) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
If predictableRoomName is true, there will be no suffix. Room name may not be unique? how about we add call ID as the suffix in this case?
dennwc
reviewed
Feb 24, 2026
alexlivekit
force-pushed
the
alexmigolin/tel-378-standalone-sip-e2e-test
branch
from
39efffe to
f16d7fe
Compare
alexlivekit
commented
Feb 26, 2026
Comment on lines
+709
to
+775
| t.Run("Direct", func(t *testing.T) { | ||
| d := &livekit.SIPDispatchRuleInfo{ | ||
| SipDispatchRuleId: "rule", | ||
| Rule: newDirectDispatch("room", ""), | ||
| HidePhoneNumber: false, | ||
| InboundNumbers: nil, | ||
| Numbers: nil, | ||
| Name: "", | ||
| Metadata: "rule-meta", | ||
| Attributes: map[string]string{ | ||
| "rule-attr": "1", | ||
| }, | ||
| } | ||
| r := &rpc.EvaluateSIPDispatchRulesRequest{ | ||
| SipCallId: "call-id", | ||
| CallingNumber: "+11112222", | ||
| CallingHost: "sip.example.com", | ||
| CalledNumber: "+3333", | ||
| ExtraAttributes: map[string]string{ | ||
| "prov-attr": "1", | ||
| }, | ||
| } | ||
| tr := &livekit.SIPInboundTrunkInfo{SipTrunkId: "trunk"} | ||
| res, err := EvaluateDispatchRule("p_123", tr, d, r) | ||
| require.NoError(t, err) | ||
| require.Equal(t, &rpc.EvaluateSIPDispatchRulesResponse{ | ||
| ProjectId: "p_123", | ||
| Result: rpc.SIPDispatchResult_ACCEPT, | ||
| SipTrunkId: "trunk", | ||
| SipDispatchRuleId: "rule", | ||
| RoomName: "room", | ||
| ParticipantIdentity: "sip_+11112222", | ||
| ParticipantName: "Phone +11112222", | ||
| ParticipantMetadata: "rule-meta", | ||
| ParticipantAttributes: map[string]string{ | ||
| "rule-attr": "1", | ||
| "prov-attr": "1", | ||
| livekit.AttrSIPCallID: "call-id", | ||
| livekit.AttrSIPTrunkID: "trunk", | ||
| livekit.AttrSIPDispatchRuleID: "rule", | ||
| livekit.AttrSIPPhoneNumber: "+11112222", | ||
| livekit.AttrSIPTrunkNumber: "+3333", | ||
| livekit.AttrSIPHostName: "sip.example.com", | ||
| }, | ||
| }, res) | ||
|
|
||
| d.HidePhoneNumber = true | ||
| res, err = EvaluateDispatchRule("p_123", tr, d, r) | ||
| require.NoError(t, err) | ||
| require.Equal(t, &rpc.EvaluateSIPDispatchRulesResponse{ | ||
| ProjectId: "p_123", | ||
| Result: rpc.SIPDispatchResult_ACCEPT, | ||
| SipTrunkId: "trunk", | ||
| SipDispatchRuleId: "rule", | ||
| RoomName: "room", | ||
| ParticipantIdentity: "sip_c15a31c71649a522", | ||
| ParticipantName: "Phone 2222", | ||
| ParticipantMetadata: "rule-meta", | ||
| ParticipantAttributes: map[string]string{ | ||
| "rule-attr": "1", | ||
| "prov-attr": "1", | ||
| livekit.AttrSIPCallID: "call-id", | ||
| livekit.AttrSIPTrunkID: "trunk", | ||
| livekit.AttrSIPDispatchRuleID: "rule", | ||
| }, | ||
| }, res) | ||
| }) |
Contributor
Author
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Unchanged from existing tests, just moved from TestEvaluateDispatchRule into TestEvaluateDispatchRule/Direct. GH differ is not ideal here.
hechen-eng
reviewed
Feb 26, 2026
| string pin = 2; | ||
|
|
||
| // Optionally append random suffix | ||
| bool no_randomness = 3; |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
when this is set, we are saying it's the user's responsibility to guarantee the uniqueness of room name, right? what happens if two rooms have the same name?
Contributor
Author
There was a problem hiding this comment.
If two callers specify the same room name, they will be connected to the same room.
Hence really not wanting the default (generate randomness today) to flip (to no unique suffixes) and potentially mess customer flows.
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
3 participants
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
No description provided.