In my defense, i think the discussion was something like this... milosz: mediant gateways wont work. tony: use a patton gateway. milosz: im on 3.8.x, problems with this and that, how do i fix it. tony: use a patton gateway. upgrade to 3.10.x and work through your issues. milosz: what about HA. tony: you can implement HA after the system is installed. I think it's more problematic right now until you find all your issues out before introducing something new.
As the system is maturing, HA is getting easier. I think if you're new to sipx it's easier to 'slip' into a non HA system and get your feet wet first, that's all. Tony >>> Kevin Thorley <[email protected]> 02/13/09 5:40 PM >>> On Fri, 2009-02-13 at 14:31 -0500, milosz wrote: > i remember talking to tony about it a while back and he basically > convinced me to not use it. i don't recall his reasons anymore, > though, something like "it's more trouble than it's worth." one of my > deployments keeps getting bigger and having only one box is making me > nervous. is there a straightforward way of moving an existing > deployment to an HA config? > > are there any complexity issues with HA other than you have to > configure dns? cause i am fully ready to configure dns. > With the release of 4.0, configuring HA should be much simplified. The DNS configuration will still need to be handled, but from a sipX configuration point of view, adding a new server to support HA should be much easier. No more hand-editing of configuration files Kevin _______________________________________________ sipx-users mailing list [email protected] List Archive: http://list.sipfoundry.org/archive/sipx-users Unsubscribe: http://list.sipfoundry.org/mailman/listinfo/sipx-users
_______________________________________________ sipx-users mailing list [email protected] List Archive: http://list.sipfoundry.org/archive/sipx-users Unsubscribe: http://list.sipfoundry.org/mailman/listinfo/sipx-users
