Nothing that I have heard of!! By the way, even if you do, doesnt it sound 
like a hack? That's what I meant. The option a. is not really difficult.

+Fasih
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Aswin Bhupalam" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Fasih" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; 
<[email protected]>
Sent: Thursday, April 06, 2006 9:03 AM
Subject: Re: [Sip-implementors] SIP Server & Redundancy


> Fasih,
> Thank you very much for the mail. I appreciate your informative response.
>
> regarding response (b), can we not instruct DNS to make one IP active
> through our application?
>
> Regards,
> Aswin Bhupalam.
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Fasih" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: <[email protected]>
> Sent: Wednesday, April 05, 2006 10:48 PM
> Subject: Re: [Sip-implementors] SIP Server & Redundancy
>
>
>> Hi
>> To me, the first option looks much better than the second, though I am
> sure
>> there will be people who would prefer the other way.
>> Anyways, this is my bit:
>> a. Using one virtual ip is pretty straight-forward. You do an ioctl with
>>      SIOCLIFADDIF
>>            Add a new logical interface on  a  physical  interface
>>            using an unused logical unit number.
>>
>>      SIOCLIFREMOVEIF
>>            Remove  a  logical  interface  by  specifying  its  IP
>>            address or logical interface name.man if_tcp
>>
>> This sounds simple, all you have to do is to have the standby keep track
> of
>> the status of the primary to find out when it can take over the primary
>> role.
>>
>> b. You can use multiple ip/ports in the same DNS record, that is simple
> also
>> [Though I have not done it, but I am very sure it is possible to define
>> multiple ip/ports in the same recrds.] However, here the DNS server will
> do
>> the decission on who is going to be active. I dont think that it is that
>> desirable. For e.g there might be some configuration problem on one
> machine.
>> Whereas it is reachable, it is not active. Or better still. You want to
>> upgrade the s/w and you wud like to upgrade the secondary... ask it to
>> become the primary.... bring down the primary when it is done with its
>> processing... upgrade it..... bring it back to life.... now... if u use
>> DNS.... I am not sure this would be possible without hacks.....
>>
>> Regards
>> +Fasih
>>
>> > All,
>> > How do we implement SIP Server redundancy in solaris?
>> > a) Using One Virtual IP address(for SIP Signalling) for two different
>> > solaris machines and
>> >     making it's interface as active/inactive depending on the status of
>> > SIP Servers.
>> >
>> > b) Using One domain name and register the ipaddress of the Active SIP
>> > Server with DNS.
>> >
>> > If we choose (a), how should we make the ethereal interface
>> > active/inactive from the application.
>> > Are there any APIs'/system-calls for the same?
>> >
>> > If we choose (b), how should we register the ipaddress of the active 
>> > SIP
>> > Server to DNS from the application.
>> > (The disadvantage here is, we should configure the domain name always 
>> > in
>> > the SIP Phones).
>> >
>> > Also, please let me know which solution is better.
>> >
>> > Thanks & Regards,
>> > Aswin Bhupalam.
>> ----- Original Message -----
>> From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> To: <[email protected]>
>> Sent: Wednesday, April 05, 2006 11:00 AM
>> Subject: Sip-implementors Digest, Vol 37, Issue 9
>>
>>
>> > Send Sip-implementors mailing list submissions to
>> > [email protected]
>> >
>> > To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
>> > https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/cucslists/listinfo/sip-implementors
>> > or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
>> > [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> >
>> > You can reach the person managing the list at
>> > [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> >
>> > When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
>> > than "Re: Contents of Sip-implementors digest..."
>> >
>> >
>> > Today's Topics:
>> >
>> >   1. Early media (Erez Morabia)
>> >   2. SIP Server & Redundancy. (Aswin Bhupalam)
>> >   3. Processing 301/302  with muliple contacts
>> >      (Srinivasa Rao Chigurupati)
>> >   4. Re: Processing 301/302  with muliple contacts (Dale R. Worley)
>> >   5. Query on PRACK (Rajendra, Subbu)
>> >
>> >
>> > ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>> >
>> > Message: 1
>> > Date: Wed, 5 Apr 2006 08:24:56 +0300
>> > From: "Erez Morabia" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> > Subject: [Sip-implementors] Early media
>> > To: <[email protected]>
>> > Message-ID:
>> > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
>> >
>> > Hi,
>> >
>> > According toe RFC3264 (An Offer-Answer Model with SDP):
>> >
>> > 1. The IP address and port present in the offer indicate nothing about
>> > the source IP address and source port of RTP and RTCP packets that will
>> > be sent by the offerer.
>> >
>> > 2. Once the offerer has sent the offer, it MUST be prepared to receive
>> > media for any recvonly streams described by that offer. It MUST be
>> > prepared to send and receive media for any sendrecv streams in the
>> > offer, and send media for any sendonly streams in the offer (of course,
>> > it cannot actually send until the peer provides an answer with the
>> > needed address and port information). In the case of RTP, even though 
>> > it
>> > may receive media before the answer arrives, it will not be able to 
>> > send
>> > RTCP receiver reports until the answer arrives.
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > How can I protect my SIP UA against DOS attacks? How can I know what is
>> > the real source IP/port of the RTP stream the sender sends toward my 
>> > SIP
>> > UA?
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > Thanks,
>> >
>> > Erez
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > ------------------------------
>> >
>> > Message: 2
>> > Date: Wed, 5 Apr 2006 11:42:15 +0530
>> > From: "Aswin Bhupalam" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> > Subject: [Sip-implementors] SIP Server & Redundancy.
>> > To: <[email protected]>
>> > Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
>> >
>> > All,
>> > How do we implement SIP Server redundancy in solaris?
>> > a) Using One Virtual IP address(for SIP Signalling) for two different
>> > solaris machines and
>> >     making it's interface as active/inactive depending on the status of
>> > SIP Servers.
>> >
>> > b) Using One domain name and register the ipaddress of the Active SIP
>> > Server with DNS.
>> >
>> > If we choose (a), how should we make the ethereal interface
>> > active/inactive from the application.
>> > Are there any APIs'/system-calls for the same?
>> >
>> > If we choose (b), how should we register the ipaddress of the active 
>> > SIP
>> > Server to DNS from the application.
>> > (The disadvantage here is, we should configure the domain name always 
>> > in
>> > the SIP Phones).
>> >
>> > Also, please let me know which solution is better.
>> >
>> > Thanks & Regards,
>> > Aswin Bhupalam.
>> >
>> >
>> > ------------------------------
>> >
>> > Message: 3
>> > Date: Wed, 05 Apr 2006 18:04:21 +0530
>> > From: Srinivasa Rao Chigurupati <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> > Subject: [Sip-implementors] Processing 301/302  with muliple contacts
>> > To: [email protected]
>> > Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
>> >
>> > Hi
>> > If  UA gets 301/302 response to INVITE with multiple contacts
>> > with/without q parameter, how should UA try new calls?
>> > Should UA fork call to all contacts at once, or
>> > should UA first try call to the contact with highest q value and say
>> > that doesn't respond, should it try call to next contact?
>> >
>> > --
>> > Thanks & Regards
>> > Srinivasa Rao Chigurupati
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > ------------------------------
>> >
>> > Message: 4
>> > Date: Wed, 05 Apr 2006 09:18:22 -0400
>> > From: "Dale R. Worley" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> > Subject: Re: [Sip-implementors] Processing 301/302  with muliple
>> > contacts
>> > To: Sip-Implementors <[email protected]>
>> > Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> > Content-Type: text/plain
>> >
>> > On Wed, 2006-04-05 at 18:04 +0530, Srinivasa Rao Chigurupati wrote:
>> >> If  UA gets 301/302 response to INVITE with multiple contacts
>> >> with/without q parameter, how should UA try new calls?
>> >> Should UA fork call to all contacts at once, or
>> >> should UA first try call to the contact with highest q value and say
>> >> that doesn't respond, should it try call to next contact?
>> >
>> > RFC 3261 gives the UA-acting-as-a-proxy much latitude, but the
>> > convention are:
>> >
>> > - contacts without q act as if they have q=1
>> >
>> > - contacts are attempted in the groups that have the same q value,
>> > highest q values first
>> >
>> > - contacts in a group are attempted in parallel
>> >
>> > Dale
>> >
>> > ---
>> > interop.pingtel.com -- the public SIP phone interoperability test 
>> > server
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > ------------------------------
>> >
>> > Message: 5
>> > Date: Wed, 5 Apr 2006 11:54:26 -0400
>> > From: "Rajendra, Subbu" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> > Subject: [Sip-implementors] Query on PRACK
>> > To: "Sip-Implementors" <[email protected]>
>> > Message-ID:
>> > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
>> >
>> > Hi,
>> > If a UAS tries to send a provisional response reliably (by including
>> > "Require: 100rel" header) to a UAC that does not support the 100rel 
>> > tag,
>> > what should be the course of action that the UAC should take? Should 
>> > UAC
>> > ignore this tag and process the provisional response unreliably or
> should
>> > it cancel the INVITE? Any pointers to this would be helpful. Thanks in
>> > advance.
>> >
>> > Regards,
>> > Subbu
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > ------------------------------
>> >
>> > _______________________________________________
>> > Sip-implementors mailing list
>> > [email protected]
>> > https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/cucslists/listinfo/sip-implementors
>> >
>> >
>> > End of Sip-implementors Digest, Vol 37, Issue 9
>> > ***********************************************
>> >
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Sip-implementors mailing list
>> [email protected]
>> https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/cucslists/listinfo/sip-implementors
>
> 


_______________________________________________
Sip-implementors mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/cucslists/listinfo/sip-implementors

Reply via email to