Brett, on the HA/carrier-grade side there is little-advertized
middle-layer component called "rtp_cluster", which in essence is
load-balancing, transparent dispatcher that can be inserted in
between some call-controlling component like OpenSIPS or Sippy B2BUA
and bunch of RTPP instances running on the same or multiple nodes.
From the point of view of that OpenSIPS it's just another RTPP instance.
And it handles all logic necessary to load-balance incoming requests
between online instances plus it can handle dynamic re-confiduration
of the cluster and track individual nodes going up and down. The
code is pretty usable, we have it deployed for several customers and
it's being actively developed as well. We have it working reliably
controlling up to 30-40 RTPP instances scattered over at least 5 nodes.
http://sourceforge.net/p/sippy/sippy/ci/master/tree/rtp_cluster/
We have at least one pretty well known service provider whose name
starts with capital V using it in combination with OpenSIPS to load
balance RTP traffic via bunch of Amazon EC2 instances.
On Tue, May 27, 2014 at 6:52 AM, Brett Nemeroff <[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
Just wanted to add my 0.02 here..
I totally agree with Bogdan. For the applications where opensips
+ a RTP relay make sense, HA and persistence are much more
important.
WebRTC and ICE are kinda applications in of themselves. And
although these applications are going to grow in popularity, the
"legacy" needs for an RTP relay are still massively prevalent in
the space. A general push towards "Carrier Grade", resiliency
and redundancy I think is much better for the project as a whole.
Not only that, consider that applications requiring ICE or
WebRTC will greatly benefit from HA / persistence, but not so
much the other way around :)
YMMV
-Brett
On Sun, May 25, 2014 at 6:30 AM, Bogdan-Andrei Iancu
<[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
Hello,
As always, the truth is in the middle.
I agree RTPP is behind on certain things (and this is why we
want to do them), but on the other hand it is a good
platform with other good features (missing on the other
relays). RTPP has better ability in individually controlling
the stream (audio /video), ability to set timeouts and
onhold with no conflicts, ability to generates events on
timeout, more flexibility in handling symmetric / asymmetric
NATs, ability to do media injection (playback), ability to
do call recording
What neither mediaproxy, nor rtpengine have is a mechanism
for implementing RTP failover (for ongoing calls) or restart
persistence . This is something we want to look into. I
would love to have ICE and WebRTC on my media relay, for the
HA and persistence are more important I would say.
Regards,
Bogdan-Andrei Iancu
OpenSIPS Founder and Developer
http://www.opensips-solutions.com <http://www.opensips-solutions.com/>
On 24.05.2014 01 <tel:24.05.2014%2001>:59, Muhammad Shahzad
Shafi wrote:
To be honest, i have stopped using rtpproxy for over 2
years now. It is not evolving as fast as it should be,
specially in the context of ICE and WebRTC technologies.
I would like to suggest that opensips team should consider
adding support for rtpengine from SIPWise,
https://github.com/sipwise/rtpengine
For now mediaproxy from AG Projects is the only good choice
for handling media in opensips with ICE support (though it
still lacks WebRTC features).
Thank you.
On 2014-05-23 14:55, Bogdan-Andrei Iancu wrote:
Going for a public exposure on this question to Maxim,
maybe we will get an answer here.
-------- Original Message --------
Subject: RTPproxy project
Date: Mon, 14 Apr 2014 15:03:31 +0300
From: Bogdan-Andrei Iancu
To: Maxim Sobolev
CC: Razvan Crainea
Hello Maxim,
Long time, no talks, but I hope everything is fine on your side.
I'm reaching you in order to ask about your future plans in regards to
the rtpproxy project? We see no much activity around it and other media
relays are popping around.
RTPP is an essential component for us, we invested a lot of work, we
have many patches (extensions) for it (which we want to push to the
public tree, but there is no answer on this) and we are also looking for
investing a lot into big future plans (as adding more functionalities).
Now, my question is - what is your commitment and disponibility for the
RTPP project ? depending on that we what to re-position ourselves, as we
do not want to waste time and work on things which are out of control.
Best regards,
--
Bogdan-Andrei Iancu
OpenSIPS Founder and Developer
http://www.opensips-solutions.com <http://www.opensips-solutions.com/>
--
Mit freundlichen Grüßen
Muhammad Shahzad
-----------------------------------
CISCO Rich Media Communication Specialist (CRMCS)
CISCO Certified Network Associate (CCNA)
Cell:+49 176 99 83 10 85 <tel:%2B49%20176%2099%2083%2010%2085>
MSN:[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>
Email:[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>
_______________________________________________
Users mailing list
[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>
http://lists.opensips.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users
_______________________________________________
Users mailing list
[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>
http://lists.opensips.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users
_______________________________________________
Devel mailing list
[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>
http://lists.opensips.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/devel
--
Maksym Sobolyev
Sippy Software, Inc.
Internet Telephony (VoIP) Experts
Tel (Canada): +1-778-783-0474
Tel (Toll-Free): +1-855-747-7779
Fax: +1-866-857-6942
Web: http://www.sippysoft.com <http://www.sippysoft.com/>
MSN: [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>
Skype: SippySoft
