Invalid report.
---
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/OpenSIPS/opensips/issues/198#issuecomment-41141446___
Devel mailing list
Devel@lists.opensips.org
http://lists.opensips.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/devel
Closed #198.
---
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/OpenSIPS/opensips/issues/198___
Devel mailing list
Devel@lists.opensips.org
http://lists.opensips.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/devel
Hello,
Even though your scenario seems to work within your testing network, things
will not be the same in the real world, because the listening socket really
needs to match the initial one (of OpenSIPS instance 1) if you want to reach a
client who is behind NAT from the secondary instance
Hello, i am testing the new feature binary interface with the usrloc module.
My tests are with 3 OpenSIPS servers.
10.64.7.20 | 10.64.7.21 | 10.64.7.22
so, when i register a new sip extensions on the first node, y could see events
come in the rest nodes but there is also the next error:
```
Hi,
The data replication feature (of dialog and usrloc) aims to offer hot backup
machines. These backup machines must listen on the same interface as the
original machine (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Virtual_IP_address). This offers
quick failover without the need for DB reload operations at
ok, understood.
My intention here is to have multiples opensips sharing all of them usrloc info
(without using db_url).
If i do:
(only comment the check of local socket)
```
--- a/modules/usrloc/ureplication.c
+++ b/modules/usrloc/ureplication.c
@@ -294,10 +294,10 @@ static int
Hi,
The bad news is that all modules which depend on usrloc and make use of
ucontact_t.sock may behave unexpectendly (maybe OK, maybe minor error reports
or, maybe some unhandled crash?)
The good news is that **nathelper** is the only module in this situation. So
unless you're using contact
Great! in that case, would be correct to have a parameter to disable the check
of local socket in usrloc module?
maybe, skip_replicated_local_socket (int) ?
Best regards.
---
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
