Re: [OpenSIPS-Users] topology_hinding & load_balancer

2018-03-12 Thread Mirko Csiky
Hi Bogdan,
Thanks for info!
In fact, the problem did not even exist ! The real problem was caused by
SIPP "pause" command: it didnt work (at all).
So the SIPP uac scenario (invite, ack, pause 20secodns,bye) worked withoud
"pause 20seconds" -> the calls were so fast that TH & LB monitoring with
fifo lb_list  was not possible (lb_load was always 0). That was the cause
that i thought: it doesnt funtcionate at all!
Since we replaced SIPP uac client with real client, the problem can not be
reproduced.
I have another problem now there:
  In incoming INVITE, in Contact header is "src" parameter (the part of
SIPREC). This parameter will be omitted by OpenSips ( with TH & LB ) in
forwareded INVITE ! (xml from multipart will be forwarded)
Can you help here ? Is it possible to recreate it - by some options /
manipulations in routing script ?
best regards
Mirko


On Mon, Mar 12, 2018 at 3:25 PM, Bogdan-Andrei Iancu 
wrote:

> Hi Mirko,
>
> I suspect you messed up the routing for sequential requests when you added
> the TH. And if the sequential requests are not properly handled anymore
> from dialog perspective, the dialog module will not be able to count the
> ongoing calls, so the balancing process will get broken.
>
> Have you added/replaced the "loose_route()" with "topology_hiding_match()"
> in your script ?
>
> If you do "dlg_list" do you see the calls in state 4 (established) ?
>
> Regards,
>
> Bogdan-Andrei Iancu
>
> OpenSIPS Founder and Developer
>   http://www.opensips-solutions.com
> OpenSIPS Summit 2018
>   http://www.opensips.org/events/Summit-2018Amsterdam
>
> On 03/06/2018 04:42 PM, Mirko Csiky wrote:
>
> Hi community,
> since we activated the topology hiding module in our load_balance test
> scenario (sipp uac -> opensips & load_balance ->  5x - sipp uas), load
> balance functionality always choose the same destination (from 5 possible).
> I can not see the link between topology_hiding & 
> load_balance_destination_choice,
> why is it so ?
> Does anyone have experience with topology_hiding&load_balance  /
> workaround-idea ?
> best regards
> Mirko
>
>
>
> ___
> Users mailing 
> listUsers@lists.opensips.orghttp://lists.opensips.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users
>
>
>
___
Users mailing list
Users@lists.opensips.org
http://lists.opensips.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users


Re: [OpenSIPS-Users] topology_hinding & load_balancer

2018-03-12 Thread Bogdan-Andrei Iancu

Hi Mirko,

I suspect you messed up the routing for sequential requests when you 
added the TH. And if the sequential requests are not properly handled 
anymore from dialog perspective, the dialog module will not be able to 
count the ongoing calls, so the balancing process will get broken.


Have you added/replaced the "loose_route()" with 
"topology_hiding_match()" in your script ?


If you do "dlg_list" do you see the calls in state 4 (established) ?

Regards,

Bogdan-Andrei Iancu

OpenSIPS Founder and Developer
  http://www.opensips-solutions.com
OpenSIPS Summit 2018
  http://www.opensips.org/events/Summit-2018Amsterdam

On 03/06/2018 04:42 PM, Mirko Csiky wrote:

Hi community,
since we activated the topology hiding module in our load_balance test 
scenario (sipp uac -> opensips & load_balance ->  5x - sipp uas), load 
balance functionality always choose the same destination (from 5 
possible). I can not see the link between topology_hiding & 
load_balance_destination_choice, why is it so ?
Does anyone have experience with topology_hiding&load_balance  / 
workaround-idea ?

best regards
Mirko



___
Users mailing list
Users@lists.opensips.org
http://lists.opensips.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users


___
Users mailing list
Users@lists.opensips.org
http://lists.opensips.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users


[OpenSIPS-Users] topology_hinding & load_balancer

2018-03-06 Thread Mirko Csiky
Hi community,
since we activated the topology hiding module in our load_balance test
scenario (sipp uac -> opensips & load_balance ->  5x - sipp uas), load
balance functionality always choose the same destination (from 5 possible).
I can not see the link between topology_hiding &
load_balance_destination_choice, why is it so ?
Does anyone have experience with topology_hiding&load_balance  /
workaround-idea ?
best regards
Mirko
___
Users mailing list
Users@lists.opensips.org
http://lists.opensips.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users