Re: [asterisk-users] Load balancing Asterisk.
Foundry serverIron does support SIP and its ASIC not a linux box Load balancer like F5, Refer to Chapter 10 (page 677) of ServerIron manual. It explains everything in detail. Also you may need to play with source nat a little bit to make your specific configuration work, but it should work, at least in theory. On Thu, Nov 20, 2008 at 10:25 AM, Alex Balashov abalas...@evaristesys.comwrote: SIP wrote: As for the current F5 SIP load balancer, we tried it a few years back and it was a dismal failure. It wanted to do cookie-based SIP load balancing and only worked with certain SIP proxies. I assume that is because there is no way RFC-supported way to insert a cookie into a SIP session that persists throughout the entire exchange with a client, including all in-dialog requests, subsequent sessions, etc? The only way I know of to make a cookie stick on the UAC side is to put an LR parameter into the route set, but that will only last within a dialog. So, I'm assuming certain SIP proxies had proprietary ways of getting around that in order to work with F5? -- Alex Balashov Evariste Systems Web: http://www.evaristesys.com/ Tel: (+1) (678) 954-0670 Direct : (+1) (678) 954-0671 Mobile : (+1) (706) 338-8599 ___ -- Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com -- asterisk-users mailing list To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users ___ -- Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com -- asterisk-users mailing list To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
Re: [asterisk-users] Load balancing Asterisk.
2008/11/20 Nitzan Kon [EMAIL PROTECTED] Hello! We're looking for a solution to reliably load balance our Asterisk boxes. So far we've been using a hodge-podge of directing different services to different boxes/IPs, but eventually I'd like to consolidate things so we can present a single IP address to the outside world. My question is - how do we go about doing that? I've read a lot of things like load-balancing via DUNDi or OpenSER, but it seems to me like these approaches just add to the list of possible failures. In other words I'd like to avoid software solutions. Is it possible to just put Asterisk behind a load balancer? I imagine most of them are optimized for web traffic rather than UDP voice packets. Does that matter? Would any load balancer do - or only specific models will work? my guess is any model will work, but some of them may not be able to handle the load. Any recommended models? I know there are some fancy LBs out there that can actually load balance based on the SIP session rather than something like IP, but I'm afraid to even look at the price tag. I'm more than fine with balancing by user IP address instead - if that works. :) Would appreciate any comments or ideas. Thanks! -- Nitzan Kon, CEO Future Nine Corporation www.future-nine.com ___ -- Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com -- asterisk-users mailing list To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users 2 openser servers with 3 ip adresses (1 virtual) + heartbeat to ensure the failover + watchdog to ensure if opensips/kamalio/openser crashes a nice failover reboot, it is working stable here (dispatching to 10 servers + owners DID dispatch to their respective servers) join #opensips on freenode if you need more info. ___ -- Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com -- asterisk-users mailing list To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
Re: [asterisk-users] Load balancing Asterisk.
--- On Thu, 11/20/08, Grygoriy Dobrovolskyy [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: 2 openser servers with 3 ip adresses (1 virtual) + heartbeat to ensure the failover + watchdog to ensure if opensips/kamalio/openser crashes a nice failover reboot, it is working stable here (dispatching to 10 servers + owners DID dispatch to their respective servers) join #opensips on freenode if you need more info. Thanks for the info. :) I want to stay away from software solutions however. Are there any hardware solutions? would a plain load balancer work? If we can't get it working with a LB we'll look at OpenSIPS, but I'd like to explore hardware options first. Thanks! -- Nitzan Kon, CEO Future Nine Corporation www.future-nine.com ___ -- Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com -- asterisk-users mailing list To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
Re: [asterisk-users] Load balancing Asterisk.
What do you mean by hardware options? There are no ASIC-assisted SIP load balancers out there. :-) The embedded hardware-based options are load balancers built just like PCs - often on top of a UNIX kernel - that run a software application-aware load balancing suite. Your best bet is a proxy for the round-robin part, and Linux-HA for the high availability of the proxy, as Grygoriy suggested. Nitzan Kon wrote: --- On Thu, 11/20/08, Grygoriy Dobrovolskyy [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: 2 openser servers with 3 ip adresses (1 virtual) + heartbeat to ensure the failover + watchdog to ensure if opensips/kamalio/openser crashes a nice failover reboot, it is working stable here (dispatching to 10 servers + owners DID dispatch to their respective servers) join #opensips on freenode if you need more info. Thanks for the info. :) I want to stay away from software solutions however. Are there any hardware solutions? would a plain load balancer work? If we can't get it working with a LB we'll look at OpenSIPS, but I'd like to explore hardware options first. Thanks! -- Nitzan Kon, CEO Future Nine Corporation www.future-nine.com ___ -- Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com -- asterisk-users mailing list To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users -- Alex Balashov Evariste Systems Web: http://www.evaristesys.com/ Tel: (+1) (678) 954-0670 Direct : (+1) (678) 954-0671 Mobile : (+1) (706) 338-8599 ___ -- Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com -- asterisk-users mailing list To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
Re: [asterisk-users] Load balancing Asterisk.
Hardware solutions are of course simply packaged software solutions. Personally I would go with something that has this wonderful support base and quick solutions versus dealing with a vendor. You did mention that price was a consideration, right? j On Thu, 20 Nov 2008, Nitzan Kon wrote: --- On Thu, 11/20/08, Grygoriy Dobrovolskyy [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: 2 openser servers with 3 ip adresses (1 virtual) + heartbeat to ensure the failover + watchdog to ensure if opensips/kamalio/openser crashes a nice failover reboot, it is working stable here (dispatching to 10 servers + owners DID dispatch to their respective servers) join #opensips on freenode if you need more info. Thanks for the info. :) I want to stay away from software solutions however. Are there any hardware solutions? would a plain load balancer work? If we can't get it working with a LB we'll look at OpenSIPS, but I'd like to explore hardware options first. Thanks! -- Nitzan Kon, CEO Future Nine Corporation www.future-nine.com ___ -- Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com -- asterisk-users mailing list To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users ___ -- Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com -- asterisk-users mailing list To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
Re: [asterisk-users] Load balancing Asterisk.
Alex, I realize and agree that hardware load balancers are actually software based. I'm less concerned about that and more about the general specs: Foundry ServerIron XL: rated for 1,000,000 concurrent connections Linux box where OpenSIPS is sitting: rated for ...??? Not to mention a simple rule on a load balancer would be much, much easier to implement. All I need is IP-based load balancing so installing and maintaining OpenSIPS is an overkill. Again, I appreciate the feedback but I am not asking nor looking for a software solution. My question is simple: Will a HARDWARE load balancer work? any reason why it WON'T work? Thanks! --- On Thu, 11/20/08, Alex Balashov [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: What do you mean by hardware options? There are no ASIC-assisted SIP load balancers out there. :-) The embedded hardware-based options are load balancers built just like PCs - often on top of a UNIX kernel - that run a software application-aware load balancing suite. Your best bet is a proxy for the round-robin part, and Linux-HA for the high availability of the proxy, as Grygoriy suggested. Nitzan Kon wrote: --- On Thu, 11/20/08, Grygoriy Dobrovolskyy [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: 2 openser servers with 3 ip adresses (1 virtual) + heartbeat to ensure the failover + watchdog to ensure if opensips/kamalio/openser crashes a nice failover reboot, it is working stable here (dispatching to 10 servers + owners DID dispatch to their respective servers) join #opensips on freenode if you need more info. Thanks for the info. :) I want to stay away from software solutions however. Are there any hardware solutions? would a plain load balancer work? If we can't get it working with a LB we'll look at OpenSIPS, but I'd like to explore hardware options first. Thanks! -- Nitzan Kon, CEO Future Nine Corporation www.future-nine.com ___ -- Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com -- asterisk-users mailing list To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
Re: [asterisk-users] Load balancing Asterisk.
Nitzan Kon wrote: Foundry ServerIron XL: rated for 1,000,000 concurrent connections Linux box where OpenSIPS is sitting: rated for ...??? Because OpenSER's load balancer is hash-based and not stateful, it is rated for far, far more than that. -- Alex Balashov Evariste Systems Web: http://www.evaristesys.com/ Tel: (+1) (678) 954-0670 Direct : (+1) (678) 954-0671 Mobile : (+1) (706) 338-8599 ___ -- Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com -- asterisk-users mailing list To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
Re: [asterisk-users] Load balancing Asterisk.
Unless the LB is SIP-aware, and can maintain a SIP session, I don't see how it would work. As the SIP command stream sends discrete commands, without some sort of basic level of session awareness, there's no guarantee over a reasonable-length call that the INVITE and BYE would even get sent to the same Asterisk box. If there are on-hold messages or transfers occurring, you add even more possibility of error into the mix. Now... you could do some sort of VERY long session timeout, but overall, that's a hack that's going to drop your concurrent connection count faster than using a smaller box would. I don't know of any functioning, SIP-aware load balancers at the moment. Doesn't mean they don't exist. I just can't think of any off the top of my head. N. Nitzan Kon wrote: Alex, I realize and agree that hardware load balancers are actually software based. I'm less concerned about that and more about the general specs: Foundry ServerIron XL: rated for 1,000,000 concurrent connections Linux box where OpenSIPS is sitting: rated for ...??? Not to mention a simple rule on a load balancer would be much, much easier to implement. All I need is IP-based load balancing so installing and maintaining OpenSIPS is an overkill. Again, I appreciate the feedback but I am not asking nor looking for a software solution. My question is simple: Will a HARDWARE load balancer work? any reason why it WON'T work? Thanks! --- On Thu, 11/20/08, Alex Balashov [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: What do you mean by hardware options? There are no ASIC-assisted SIP load balancers out there. :-) The embedded hardware-based options are load balancers built just like PCs - often on top of a UNIX kernel - that run a software application-aware load balancing suite. Your best bet is a proxy for the round-robin part, and Linux-HA for the high availability of the proxy, as Grygoriy suggested. Nitzan Kon wrote: --- On Thu, 11/20/08, Grygoriy Dobrovolskyy [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: 2 openser servers with 3 ip adresses (1 virtual) + heartbeat to ensure the failover + watchdog to ensure if opensips/kamalio/openser crashes a nice failover reboot, it is working stable here (dispatching to 10 servers + owners DID dispatch to their respective servers) join #opensips on freenode if you need more info. Thanks for the info. :) I want to stay away from software solutions however. Are there any hardware solutions? would a plain load balancer work? If we can't get it working with a LB we'll look at OpenSIPS, but I'd like to explore hardware options first. Thanks! -- Nitzan Kon, CEO Future Nine Corporation www.future-nine.com ___ -- Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com -- asterisk-users mailing list To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users ___ -- Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com -- asterisk-users mailing list To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
Re: [asterisk-users] Load balancing Asterisk.
The solution to make this work and still work statelessly is to hash various unique identifying bits of the SIP headers without maintaining transactional, session or dialog information as such. SIP wrote: Unless the LB is SIP-aware, and can maintain a SIP session, I don't see how it would work. As the SIP command stream sends discrete commands, without some sort of basic level of session awareness, there's no guarantee over a reasonable-length call that the INVITE and BYE would even get sent to the same Asterisk box. If there are on-hold messages or transfers occurring, you add even more possibility of error into the mix. Now... you could do some sort of VERY long session timeout, but overall, that's a hack that's going to drop your concurrent connection count faster than using a smaller box would. I don't know of any functioning, SIP-aware load balancers at the moment. Doesn't mean they don't exist. I just can't think of any off the top of my head. N. Nitzan Kon wrote: Alex, I realize and agree that hardware load balancers are actually software based. I'm less concerned about that and more about the general specs: Foundry ServerIron XL: rated for 1,000,000 concurrent connections Linux box where OpenSIPS is sitting: rated for ...??? Not to mention a simple rule on a load balancer would be much, much easier to implement. All I need is IP-based load balancing so installing and maintaining OpenSIPS is an overkill. Again, I appreciate the feedback but I am not asking nor looking for a software solution. My question is simple: Will a HARDWARE load balancer work? any reason why it WON'T work? Thanks! --- On Thu, 11/20/08, Alex Balashov [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: What do you mean by hardware options? There are no ASIC-assisted SIP load balancers out there. :-) The embedded hardware-based options are load balancers built just like PCs - often on top of a UNIX kernel - that run a software application-aware load balancing suite. Your best bet is a proxy for the round-robin part, and Linux-HA for the high availability of the proxy, as Grygoriy suggested. Nitzan Kon wrote: --- On Thu, 11/20/08, Grygoriy Dobrovolskyy [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: 2 openser servers with 3 ip adresses (1 virtual) + heartbeat to ensure the failover + watchdog to ensure if opensips/kamalio/openser crashes a nice failover reboot, it is working stable here (dispatching to 10 servers + owners DID dispatch to their respective servers) join #opensips on freenode if you need more info. Thanks for the info. :) I want to stay away from software solutions however. Are there any hardware solutions? would a plain load balancer work? If we can't get it working with a LB we'll look at OpenSIPS, but I'd like to explore hardware options first. Thanks! -- Nitzan Kon, CEO Future Nine Corporation www.future-nine.com ___ -- Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com -- asterisk-users mailing list To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users ___ -- Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com -- asterisk-users mailing list To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users -- Alex Balashov Evariste Systems Web: http://www.evaristesys.com/ Tel: (+1) (678) 954-0670 Direct : (+1) (678) 954-0671 Mobile : (+1) (706) 338-8599 ___ -- Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com -- asterisk-users mailing list To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
Re: [asterisk-users] Load balancing Asterisk.
This baby talks about being able to do hardware SIP load balancing. http://www.f5.com/news-press-events/press/2007/20070212.html I've never used an f5 product so I can't provide any comments from experience. I did look at an f5 load balancer product once and the price was over 6 figures that was a few years ago though. Regards, Greyman. ___ -- Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com -- asterisk-users mailing list To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
Re: [asterisk-users] Load balancing Asterisk.
N, SIP-aware LBs do exist - but way way out of my price range. Alex, Remember we are an Asterisk-based provider. I'm not going to drop enough money on a load balancer to go bankrupt. ;) That's exactly why I'm wondering if it's possible to do this with a DUMB load balancer. i.e. one that would cost about the same as building another Linux box for OpenSIPS. I don't need a million concurrent connections. I'd be perfectly happy with a fraction of that. Not looking to replace ATT here, just looking for something simple that will work reliably. :) My concerns with OpenSIPS: 1. It's a software based solution, which means higher chance of software-related failure, and higher chance of failure due to problems with the Linux box hosting it. 2. Overkill to install and maintain (if we can get a simpler solution) 3. Incoming calls - I admit complete ignorance. I don't know how OpenSIPS handles incoming calls, but for those to arrive at the user reliably they must arrive from the same IP address the user is registered to. Otherwise their broadband router's NAT firewall will just block the connection. How does OpenSIPS handle this? (does it handle this??) Thanks! -- Nitzan Kon, CEO Future Nine Corporation www.future-nine.com --- On Thu, 11/20/08, SIP [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Unless the LB is SIP-aware, and can maintain a SIP session, I don't see how it would work. As the SIP command stream sends discrete commands, without some sort of basic level of session awareness, there's no guarantee over a reasonable-length call that the INVITE and BYE would even get sent to the same Asterisk box. If there are on-hold messages or transfers occurring, you add even more possibility of error into the mix. Now... you could do some sort of VERY long session timeout, but overall, that's a hack that's going to drop your concurrent connection count faster than using a smaller box would. I don't know of any functioning, SIP-aware load balancers at the moment. Doesn't mean they don't exist. I just can't think of any off the top of my head. N. Nitzan Kon wrote: Alex, I realize and agree that hardware load balancers are actually software based. I'm less concerned about that and more about the general specs: Foundry ServerIron XL: rated for 1,000,000 concurrent connections Linux box where OpenSIPS is sitting: rated for ...??? Not to mention a simple rule on a load balancer would be much, much easier to implement. All I need is IP-based load balancing so installing and maintaining OpenSIPS is an overkill. Again, I appreciate the feedback but I am not asking nor looking for a software solution. My question is simple: Will a HARDWARE load balancer work? any reason why it WON'T work? Thanks! --- On Thu, 11/20/08, Alex Balashov [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: What do you mean by hardware options? There are no ASIC-assisted SIP load balancers out there. :-) The embedded hardware-based options are load balancers built just like PCs - often on top of a UNIX kernel - that run a software application-aware load balancing suite. Your best bet is a proxy for the round-robin part, and Linux-HA for the high availability of the proxy, as Grygoriy suggested. Nitzan Kon wrote: --- On Thu, 11/20/08, Grygoriy Dobrovolskyy [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: 2 openser servers with 3 ip adresses (1 virtual) + heartbeat to ensure the failover + watchdog to ensure if opensips/kamalio/openser crashes a nice failover reboot, it is working stable here (dispatching to 10 servers + owners DID dispatch to their respective servers) join #opensips on freenode if you need more info. Thanks for the info. :) I want to stay away from software solutions however. Are there any hardware solutions? would a plain load balancer work? If we can't get it working with a LB we'll look at OpenSIPS, but I'd like to explore hardware options first. Thanks! -- Nitzan Kon, CEO Future Nine Corporation www.future-nine.com ___ -- Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com -- asterisk-users mailing list To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users ___ -- Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com -- asterisk-users mailing list To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
Re: [asterisk-users] Load balancing Asterisk.
I was about to say, I'm sure F5 can do it... but... price was over 6 figures Why??! It's spending money on these types of things when they are unnecessary that is the undoing of every struggling VoIP provider I watch, in the misguided belief that only will half a million dollars get you enterprise strength. That was the conventional wisdom about Linux ten years ago too. Who's saying that now? Ditto. -- Alex Balashov Evariste Systems Web: http://www.evaristesys.com/ Tel: (+1) (678) 954-0670 Direct : (+1) (678) 954-0671 Mobile : (+1) (706) 338-8599 ___ -- Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com -- asterisk-users mailing list To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
Re: [asterisk-users] Load balancing Asterisk.
Nitzan Kon wrote: My concerns with OpenSIPS: 1. It's a software based solution, which means higher chance of software-related failure, and higher chance of failure due to problems with the Linux box hosting it. A little bit of proper engineering will overcome that reasonably. 2. Overkill to install and maintain (if we can get a simpler solution) Really? It is, admittedly, a somewhat recondite product, but you don't have to build everything you run into your core competency; you can divest yourself of some parts of your infrastructure and streamline and all that and get someone else to do it, like a real Enterprise. :-) Secondly, as difficult as it may be, I can't imagine anything simpler to accomplish what you're looking for. The logic required is quite granular. 3. Incoming calls - I admit complete ignorance. I don't know how OpenSIPS handles incoming calls, but for those to arrive at the user reliably they must arrive from the same IP address the user is registered to. Otherwise their broadband router's NAT firewall will just block the connection. How does OpenSIPS handle this? (does it handle this??) What role are you envisioning the proxy to be in here? If it's a registrar, it will have their IP information in the stored contact URI. If not, the calls can be sent somewhere else for resolution. Something, somewhere must know how to contact the user, yes. -- Alex Balashov Evariste Systems Web: http://www.evaristesys.com/ Tel: (+1) (678) 954-0670 Direct : (+1) (678) 954-0671 Mobile : (+1) (706) 338-8599 ___ -- Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com -- asterisk-users mailing list To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
Re: [asterisk-users] Load balancing Asterisk.
Alex Balashov wrote: I was about to say, I'm sure F5 can do it... but... price was over 6 figures Why??! It's spending money on these types of things when they are unnecessary that is the undoing of every struggling VoIP provider I watch, in the misguided belief that only will half a million dollars get you enterprise strength. That was the conventional wisdom about Linux ten years ago too. Who's saying that now? Ditto. F5 has ALWAYS been overpriced. Incidentally, anyone who wants to know, F5 is a unix-based box, just like the others. Last we used the F5s, they were all running a slightly modified BSDI. And only slightly modified in packaging. As for the current F5 SIP load balancer, we tried it a few years back and it was a dismal failure. It wanted to do cookie-based SIP load balancing and only worked with certain SIP proxies. N. ___ -- Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com -- asterisk-users mailing list To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
Re: [asterisk-users] Load balancing Asterisk.
2. Overkill to install and maintain (if we can get a simpler solution) I am not agreed on point 2: If I understood how to install opensips + heartbeat WITHOUT knowing any program (opensips ? heartbear ?) or programming language(hell yes!) in a week ( just knew what's invite and bye ;) a more aware IT professional could do it in 2 days ___ -- Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com -- asterisk-users mailing list To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
Re: [asterisk-users] Load balancing Asterisk.
--- On Thu, 11/20/08, Grygoriy Dobrovolskyy [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I am not agreed on point 2: If I understood how to install opensips + heartbeat WITHOUT knowing any program (opensips ? heartbear ?) or programming language(hell yes!) in a week ( just knew what's invite and bye ;) a more aware IT professional could do it in 2 days I'm actually referring mostly to the need to build, install, and maintain another set (2?) of Linux boxes. The software is the easy part. Granted, if that's what we need to do - that's what we'll do. -- Nitzan Kon, CEO Future Nine Corporation http://www.future-nine.com ___ -- Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com -- asterisk-users mailing list To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
Re: [asterisk-users] Load balancing Asterisk.
Nitzan Kon wrote: --- On Thu, 11/20/08, Grygoriy Dobrovolskyy [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I am not agreed on point 2: If I understood how to install opensips + heartbeat WITHOUT knowing any program (opensips ? heartbear ?) or programming language(hell yes!) in a week ( just knew what's invite and bye ;) a more aware IT professional could do it in 2 days I'm actually referring mostly to the need to build, install, and maintain another set (2?) of Linux boxes. The software is the easy part. As someone who hates dealing with hardware, I can relate and appreciate why this is a pain. But it's a lot easier than setting up the alternatives! -- Alex Balashov Evariste Systems Web: http://www.evaristesys.com/ Tel: (+1) (678) 954-0670 Direct : (+1) (678) 954-0671 Mobile : (+1) (706) 338-8599 ___ -- Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com -- asterisk-users mailing list To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
Re: [asterisk-users] Load balancing Asterisk.
3. Incoming calls - I admit complete ignorance. I don't know how OpenSIPS handles incoming calls, but for those to arrive at the user reliably they must arrive from the same IP address the user is registered to. Otherwise their broadband router's NAT firewall will just block the connection. How does OpenSIPS handle this? (does it handle this??) That's the big question! My company uses a custom SIP Proxy and SIP Registrar so I can't speak for the details of SER derivatives but the theory is most likely the same. Our SIP Registrar records the proxy the REGISTER request arrived on and updates the Asterisk realtime database outboundproxy field with that value. When Asterisk needs to send an incoming call to the user it looks up the SIP username in the realtime database and sends the call thorugh the correct Proxy which solves the NAT issue you mention. One trick for young players here is that the outboundproxyport setting is broken in Asterisk so your Proxy will have to run on port 5060. Regards, Greyman. ___ -- Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com -- asterisk-users mailing list To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
Re: [asterisk-users] Load balancing Asterisk.
SIP wrote: As for the current F5 SIP load balancer, we tried it a few years back and it was a dismal failure. It wanted to do cookie-based SIP load balancing and only worked with certain SIP proxies. I assume that is because there is no way RFC-supported way to insert a cookie into a SIP session that persists throughout the entire exchange with a client, including all in-dialog requests, subsequent sessions, etc? The only way I know of to make a cookie stick on the UAC side is to put an LR parameter into the route set, but that will only last within a dialog. So, I'm assuming certain SIP proxies had proprietary ways of getting around that in order to work with F5? -- Alex Balashov Evariste Systems Web: http://www.evaristesys.com/ Tel: (+1) (678) 954-0670 Direct : (+1) (678) 954-0671 Mobile : (+1) (706) 338-8599 ___ -- Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com -- asterisk-users mailing list To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
