El Miércoles, 11 de Marzo de 2009, Dale Worley escribió: > On Wed, 2009-03-11 at 19:03 +0100, Iñaki Baz Castillo wrote: > > Yes, sure that would be the ideal escenario. Unfortunatelly it's not in > > my case. Basically I have a PBX in sip1 and the same PBX in sip2. > > Clients should connect sip1 except it's unreachable so they should > > connect sip2. But it's not possible a random behaviour since both PBX's > > in sip1 and sip2 don't share location database. > > Yes, doing "high availability" in a way that allows switching between > servers to be transparent is difficult. See > http://sipxecs.sipfoundry.org/rep/sipXecs/main/sipXregistry/doc/SyncDesign. >{txt,html} for what it took in sipX.
Great document. I will read it. > > Sincerelly I think that it would be more feasible to create a solution > > based on IP failover. I do know this is not so cool as a SIP DNS > > failover mechanims but... > > IP failover would give you the ability to ensure that all REGISTERs at a > given time go to one server. But immediately after switching servers, > the new server would have no registrations in its database (as the > registrations would have expired). Right. The fact is that I could share the location database (a file in fact) with rsync or DRBD. I'll do it and use IP failover. Thanks a lot. -- Iñaki Baz Castillo _______________________________________________ Sip-implementors mailing list [email protected] https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/cucslists/listinfo/sip-implementors
