On Fri, 2009-04-03 at 15:43 -0400, Damian Krzeminski wrote: > Scott Lawrence wrote: > > On Fri, 2009-04-03 at 12:44 -0400, Damian Krzeminski wrote: > >> Scott Lawrence wrote: > >>> On Fri, 2009-04-03 at 10:48 -0400, Damian Krzeminski wrote: > >>>> It might have been wrong but this is what it was. > >>> It was wrong... not sure how we got away with it so long, but the issue > >>> is correct. > >>> > >>> > >> > >> OK let's change it then. > >> Just to make sure that we all understand how it's going to change: this is > >> what's going to look like after I commit this patch > >> > >> Single server case (no change here): > >> single server a.example.com (10.0.0.1) with registrar running on 5070 > >> > >> generated routeTo expression: > >> > >> <10.0.0.1:5070;transport=tcp;x-sipx-routetoreg> > >> > >> > >> HA Case: > >> > >> a.example.com (10.0.0.1) with registrar running on 5070 > >> b.example.com (10.0.0.2) with registrar running on 5070 > >> > >> > >> a's routeTo: > >> <rr.a.example.com;transport=tcp;x-sipx-routetoreg> > >> > >> b's routeTo: > >> <rr.b.example.com;transport=tcp;x-sipx-routetoreg> > >> > >> > >> The patch only changes SUBSCRIBE and default routing. Registrations are > >> still sent to 10.0.0.1:5070 (for 'a') and 10.0.0.2:5070 (for 'b') > >> > >> > >> Raymond: did I capture the changes correctly? > >> Scott: makes sense? > > > > Registrations should always go to a name, never an IP address. > > > > I'll rewrite the patch to make it happen... > > > The current version of the sipx-dns script always generates the > > rr.<fqdn> SRV record whether the system is HA or not, and it only > > generates a TCP version, so all routing to the registry/redirect server > > for any purpose can just be to: > > > > <rr.b.example.com;x-sipx-routetoreg> > > > > (with 'b.example.com' replaced with the fqdn of the current proxy) > > > > it's possible that systems that are being upgraded won't have that > > record, in which case this won't work until it is installed, but I think > > that the thing to do is to capture that in the release/upgrade notes. > > > > Alternatively, you could generate the registry routes with just the fqdn > > and port 5070 for non-HA systems and the rr.<fqdn> SRV name for HA > > systems. > > > > > > Let's do that - one system <fqdn>:<port>, more than one system rr.<fqdn> > Can you clarify if we should generate 'transport=tcp' in a single system case?
Yes, that would be best. _______________________________________________ sipx-dev mailing list [email protected] List Archive: http://list.sipfoundry.org/archive/sipx-dev Unsubscribe: http://list.sipfoundry.org/mailman/listinfo/sipx-dev
