Hi Yasin, Not yet tested, My bad - it's 0.1 million with TLS but yes we are yet to test ), We need to distribute the users to different Kamailio cluster through API server. However, Would like to try Option 2 as well and test with it.
Regards Pintu Lohar On Wed, Feb 27, 2019 at 7:16 PM YASIN CANER <[email protected]> wrote: > Hello Pintu > > 1 million TLS user? Have u ever test with tester on Kamailio ?Because I > remembered in sr-mails that an user tested on 1000 client on TLS transport > , it consumes so much CPU etc . I guess 1 milliyonTLSUser make big impact > your system for all registration/call. > > I tested option-2 for relaying registers about 1-2 years ago for proof of > concept. It works fine. > > you can replicate user location data by Dmq_usrloc module and can use path > header then build a triangle topology to bridge calls. > Or > You can build a Location Information service to find which kamailio has > UAC data . > > Best Regards. > > Yasin CANER > > ------------------------------ > *From:* Pintu Lohar <[email protected]> > *Sent:* Wednesday, February 27, 2019 12:27 PM > *To:* YASIN CANER > *Cc:* Kamailio (SER) - Users Mailing List > *Subject:* Re: [SR-Users] Kamailio behind NAT or With Public IP - Which > one is highly recommended > > Hi Yasin, > Thanks indeed for your valuable input for the > active-active cluster(Option-1) & Option-2 > > We definitely would like to try setting up an active-active cluster for > the next phase if not in current phase. > But In order to use Kamailio in the active-active cluster, I think we > need to forward or replicate registration to both the active-active server? > in order to proxy the invite packet through the server where the UA is > registered? > > We use the following use cases : > 1. We use FCM and APNS push to wake up the app. > 2. Multi forking / Late forking cases are also involved. > 3. Using Kamailio as a stateful proxy. > > Thanks & Regards > Pintu > > On Wed, Feb 27, 2019 at 3:10 PM YASIN CANER <[email protected]> > wrote: > > Hello, > > My suggestion is that stay away from NAT if you dont have to. various sip > client/Firewalls make out troubles for registration and invites, even if > Kamailio can handle it. If you have a high load TLS connection / > subscriber , I think you should use load balancer and NAT options. > > For example; > 1 - Load balancer like F5 that balancing your connection active-active > Kamailios > > > UAC ----> F5 ------> Kamailio -1 (advertises public IP) > | > -------> Kamailio -2 (advertises public IP) > > 2- Use kamailio as MultiHomed that convert transport layer to tcp/udp > > UAC ---------> Kamailio(TLS-PUBLIC IP-mhomed) -------> Kamailio-1(TCP/UDP) > > | > > ---------> Kamailio-2(TCP/UDP) > > > Good luck > > Yasin CANER > > ------------------------------ > *From:* sr-users <[email protected]> on behalf of Pintu > Lohar <[email protected]> > *Sent:* Tuesday, February 26, 2019 8:09 AM > *To:* [email protected] > *Subject:* [SR-Users] Kamailio behind NAT or With Public IP - Which one > is highly recommended > > Hi Everyone, > > Which one among the below option is highly recommended for setting up > Kamailio (for production) > 1. Kamailio behind NAT *or* > 2. Setting up Kamailio using public IP? > > are there any disadvantages if we setup Kamailio behind NAT and use > advertise option in listen parameters? > > We have tested both the options, and both the options work great for us( > a. Kamailio behind NAT with advertising in listen parameters b.Kamailio > setup with public IP). So wondering which one is best and highly > recommended? > > Some extra info : > 1. We use TLS > 2. Using coturn for media > > Thanks > Pintu > >
_______________________________________________ Kamailio (SER) - Users Mailing List [email protected] https://lists.kamailio.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sr-users
