On 03/29/2011 05:47 PM, Asgaroth wrote:
Hi Marius,
I can't really say that the route table will work. One way I used for
testing is via Ping or netcat without any local parameters. The
choosing of the local address and port is left to the kernel, the same
as kamailio with mhomed, so if you
Hi Marius,
> I can't really say that the route table will work. One way I used for
> testing is via Ping or netcat without any local parameters. The
> choosing of the local address and port is left to the kernel, the same
> as kamailio with mhomed, so if you can find a suitable routeing table
> wh
On 03/29/2011 03:32 PM, Asgaroth wrote:
Hi Marius,
Hello Asgaroth,
Comments inline
I have sent you another email in the thread but no reply. Can you
confirm that you have a listening UDP socket on the interface that is
selected by the kernel for sending the datagram in a mhomed
environmen
Hi Daniel,
The INVITE contains maddr=10.150.152.102 and hope server can do
multicasting to several phones to achieve paging functionality:
INVITE
sip:9621@10.150.152.102:5060;transport=udp;maddr=10.150.152.102
SIP/2.0^M
Via: SIP/2.0/UDP
10.150.151.38:5060;branch=z9hG4bK042e71c1c38
Hi Marius,
> I have sent you another email in the thread but no reply. Can you
> confirm that you have a listening UDP socket on the interface that is
> selected by the kernel for sending the datagram in a mhomed
> environment. If you are not listening on that interface Kamailio will
> complain wi
On 03/29/2011 02:42 PM, Asgaroth wrote:
Thank you all for your replies.
Hello again,
I have sent you another email in the thread but no reply. Can you
confirm that you have a listening UDP socket on the interface that is
selected by the kernel for sending the datagram in a mhomed enviro
Thank you all for your replies.
Our requirement, currently is fairly simple, and, I'm thinking that
pacemaker/heartbeat/corosync is a little more overhead than required.
Ucarp seems to fit the profile fairly well for what we are trying to
achieve.
I'd like to have kamailio decide on the outbound
> 2011/3/28 Schumann Sebastian :
> >> You are right, sorry. Anyhow, how you ever seen a XMPP server
> >> integrating some kind of interoperability/gateway with SIP? In
> >> Kamailio/*SER we have some attemps to interoperate with XMPP world.
> >
> > Openfire has SIP SIMPLE support.
>
> What compone
I'm using a different setup.
Both servers have their own fixed ip-address and both have a virtual
ip-address.
pacemaker makes sure that when one server is down, its virtual ip is
moved to the other node.
So this is more a active-active setup.
Enabled ip_nonlocal_bind, set listening to both vi
Forgot to mention - the reason it is done this way is that Kamailio cannot
bind to the virtual IP that ucarp is managing.
It has to bind to an IP address that is available the entire time.
-Original Message-
From: Paul Pankhurst
Sent: Tuesday, March 29, 2011 10:39 AM
To: SIP Router - K
On 03/29/2011 12:31 PM, Asgaroth wrote:
Hi All,
I'm trying to setup an active/passive proxy instance with kamailio
3.1.2. I'm using ucarp (www.ucarp.org) to provide the floating ip
addresses. I have installed and configured ucarp and it appears to be
working as expected.
I have configured kamai
I have kamailio working with ucarp in an active/standby mode. The way I did
it was to bind kamailio to a fixed ip address and use ip tables to forward
between the ucarp address and the fixed address. Since this is effectively a
NAT traversal as far as Kamailio is concerned, you have to setup app
Hi All,
I'm trying to setup an active/passive proxy instance with kamailio
3.1.2. I'm using ucarp (www.ucarp.org) to provide the floating ip
addresses. I have installed and configured ucarp and it appears to be
working as expected.
I have configured kamailio on both systems to be online all the t
13 matches
Mail list logo
