On Jan 16, 2007, at 8:17 AM, Jiri Kuthan wrote:
At 14:59 16/01/2007, Greg Fausak wrote:
Jiri,
Thanks for the pointer! I think I'll have to give this a look.
Hi Greg,
with pleasure. Just keep in mind that having robustness in there takes
couple of other steps. Particularly IP blacklisting to avoid attempts
to send to the DNS-conveyed destinations, which are unavailable
and ...
We are having specific problems with the DNS resolver on failover
(when one
DNS resolver is not reachable, the next is queried, and openser is
not acting
predictably when this happens). It is as if the tm module is not
properly threaded. Like when one thread gets stuck waiting for
a response from DNS resolver, another thread picks up a retry
SIP message and doesn't know about the retry in process!
... building the ser script in a way that retransmissions are absorbed
(kind of having "shock absorber" in place)
Retransmissions are good (most of the time). Somehow the ser
script would need to know that there is another thread tending to
a DNS lookup. How does my script know if a message is original,
or a retransmission anyway?
It seems to me that the tm module should be reaping the retransmits.
-g
-jiri
We see the bad resolver behavior when 2 resolvers are listed in /
etc/ resolv.conf, and
we turn off the first one.
The DNS failover is also interesting. I think failover applies to A
records
and SRV records (not NAPTR records).
-g
On Jan 16, 2007, at 7:12 AM, Jiri Kuthan wrote:
indeed, the stuff is not well linked, we are working on it. Here
you go.
http://cvs.berlios.de/cgi-bin/viewcvs.cgi/ser/sip_router/doc/
dns.txt?rev=HEAD&content-type=text/vnd.viewcvs-markup
-jiri
At 02:46 16/01/2007, T.R. Missner wrote:
Greg,
This is a ref to SER. Apparently this functionality has been added
to the new pre-release version. I did find some talk about it in
the release notes.
I couldn’t find any specific documentation. Admittedly I don’t
understand the layout of SER’s site very well as I haven’t spent
much time there.
-- TR
On 1/15/07 8:33 PM, "Greg Fausak" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
In the text below I quote Kerker 'SER does support DNS failover.'.
Is this ser or openser? Where can I read more about this?
-g
On Jan 15, 2007, at 10:40 AM, Klaus Darilion wrote:
Staffan,
Kerker Staffan wrote:
...
Now, if I disable one of the Gateways, I hang every second call.
OpenSER does
not
try the second A record address if the first doesn't answer. How
can I solve
this? Shouldn't OpenSER fail over to the second A record listed in
the NAPTR
=> SRV
resolving? Or will OpenSER continue to resend all SIP INVITES
until timers
fire? Would
it help if the proxy recieved an ICMP port/destination unreachable
from the
network? Is
there anyway to get around this? In the other direction, from POTS
to sip,
the PGW2200
nicely switches over to the second of my two OpenSER servers if I
shut one of
them down. These servers have the same DNS entries (but for
another SIP domain, NAPTR =>
SRV => 2x A record).
Yes, OpenSER or for that matter every transaction stateful proxy
should
do RFC 3263 based fail-over. But as you can imagine this is pretty
complex to implement and that's why openser does not support it
yet, it
is listed on the development roadmap. The newest release of SER
does
support DNS failover.
_______________________________________________
Users mailing list
[email protected]
<http://openser.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users>http://
openser.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users
_______________________________________________
Users mailing list
[email protected]
http://openser.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users
--
Jiri Kuthan http://iptel.org/~jiri/
--
Jiri Kuthan http://iptel.org/~jiri/
_______________________________________________
Users mailing list
[email protected]
http://openser.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users
