Thanks everyone. I was unclear from the docs the definition of "tag" and "strip", which was the original reason for my request. I thought those might have something to do with this, but I wasn't 100% sure. As everyone knows, the "tag" keyword is thrown around a lot in SIP, so I didn't want to assume anything.
Much appreciated! Geoff On Thu, Mar 5, 2009 at 4:54 PM, Fabian Borot <fbo...@gmail.com> wrote: > I think that this arrangement should work, 3 gws with different "tags", it > should do a load balancing among the 3 gws and append an specific "tag" to > each gw > 556233 for gw1 > 1 for gw2 > nothing for gw3 > > I do not know about using "#" as part of the URI, > > regards > > jp > > > lcr routes > +----+-----------------+----------+--------+----------+ > | id | prefix | from_uri | grp_id | priority | > +----+-----------------+----------+--------+----------+ > | 1 | 5555551212 | | 1 | 1 | > | 2 | 5555551212 | | 2 | 1 | > | 3 | 5555551212 | | 3 | 1 | > +----+-----------------+----------+--------+----------+ > lcr gateways > +-----------+--------------+------+------------+-----------+--------+-------+-------+-------+ > | gw_name | ip_addr | port | uri_scheme | transport | grp_id | strip > | tag | flags | > +-----------+--------------+------+------------+-----------+--------+-------+-------+-------+ > | gw1 | ip_gw_1 | 5060 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 > |556233 | 0 | > | gw2 | ip_gw_2 | 5060 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 0 | 1 > | 0 | > | gw3 | ip_gw_3 | 5060 | 1 | 1 | 3 | 0 | > | 0 | > +-----------+--------------+------+------------+-----------+--------+-------+-------+-------+ > [r...@proxy1 ~]# > [r...@proxy1 ~]# > > > On Thu, Mar 5, 2009 at 3:03 PM, Geoffrey Mina <geoffreym...@gmail.com> > wrote: >> >> Thanks! I hadn't seen that before. I have another semi-related >> question about LCR. I have multiple gateways, each require me to >> prefix the dial string with a specific account ID or rule. >> >> i.e. to dial the phone number 5555551212 I would need to do the following: >> >> gateway 1: >> #556233#5555551...@mygateway1.com >> >> gateway 2: >> +15555551...@mygateway2.com >> >> gateway3 : >> 5555551...@mygateway3.com >> >> Is there any way the LCR system can account for this, or will I need >> to build some custom functionality to make this work? >> >> Thanks, >> Geoff >> >> On Thu, Mar 5, 2009 at 2:24 PM, Daniel-Constantin Mierla >> <mico...@gmail.com> wrote: >> > Hello, >> > >> > On 03/05/2009 09:03 PM, Geoffrey Mina wrote: >> >> >> >> Hello, >> >> I am currently deploying the LCR module. I have some questions about >> >> fields and what they do... I searched the docs, but couldn't find >> >> anything. Can someone please fill in the blanks? >> >> >> > >> > have you seen (I forced a regeneration to be sure is up to date): >> > http://kamailio.org/docs/db-tables/kamailio-db-devel.html#GEN-DB-GW >> > >> > Cheers, >> > Daniel >> > >> >> [LCR Gateways] >> >> Gateway Name: description of the gateway >> >> Group ID: Numeric identifier used to link LCR Rules >> >> IP Address: The IP of the SIP gateway >> >> Hostname: The hostname of the SIP gateway (not required if IP >> >> provided?) >> >> Port: The port the SIP gateway listens on >> >> URI Scheme: (well documented) NULL = sip, 1 = sip and 2 = sips >> >> Transport: (well documented) NULL = none, 1 = udp, 2 = tcp, 3 = tls, >> >> and 4 = sctp >> >> Strip: ? >> >> Tag: ? >> >> Weight: ? >> >> Ping: ? >> >> Flags: ? >> >> >> >> [LCR Rules] >> >> Prefix: The matching prefix. In the US most would do this by area >> >> code, so I would assume I would put something like 1678 or 1770 to >> >> route Atlanta calls. Would putting a NULL or Empty String force a >> >> default route for everything? >> >> >From URI: If I don't care about the from URI can I leave this NULL or >> >> BLANK? >> >> Group ID: The numeric identifier matching to LCR Gateways >> >> Priority: I am assuming if there are 2 records which match the prefix >> >> and from URI the high priority will be chosen first? >> >> >> >> Also, say for example, one of my gateway providers has a primary and a >> >> secondary gateway. If the primary is down I need to route calls to >> >> the secondary. How would this fit into an LCR scheme? Would I need >> >> duplicate routes for the secondary with a lower priority? >> >> >> >> Thanks, >> >> Geoff >> >> >> >> p.s. for anyone holding out, I just installed Siremis today and it >> >> rocks! I am really quite pleased with the solution. >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> >> Kamailio (OpenSER) - Users mailing list >> >> Users@lists.kamailio.org >> >> http://lists.kamailio.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users >> >> http://lists.openser-project.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users >> >> >> >> >> > >> > -- >> > Daniel-Constantin Mierla >> > http://www.asipto.com >> > >> > >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Kamailio (OpenSER) - Users mailing list >> Users@lists.kamailio.org >> http://lists.kamailio.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users >> http://lists.openser-project.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users > > _______________________________________________ Kamailio (OpenSER) - Users mailing list Users@lists.kamailio.org http://lists.kamailio.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users http://lists.openser-project.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users
