17 Apr
2012
17 Apr
'12
5:40 a.m.
On 4/16/12 7:47 PM, Iñaki Baz Castillo wrote:
2012/4/16 Daniel-Constantin
Mierla<miconda(a)gmail.com>om>:
Right. That's for registration failover:
Outbund-Proxy-1
UA Registrar
Outbund-Proxy-2
or:
Registrar-1
UA
Registrar-2
(both Registrar-1 and Registrar-2 sharing same DB).
The UA mantains two registrations alive, same +sip.instance (since
it's the SAME device) but different reg-id values.
NOTE that for this to work, the UA must be provided with two
registration URI's or two Outbound proxies (or more).
so the failover should be done also for request within dialog, but this
would be possible only in combination with gruu.
Is there a rule saying if a reg-id value sets priority of contact
address, such as reg-id=1 must be selected first, and then reg-id=2, ...
Cheers,
Daniel
--
Daniel-Constantin Mierla
Kamailio Advanced Training, April 23-26, 2012, Berlin, Germany
http://www.asipto.com/index.php/kamailio-advanced-training/
Also take
into account that RFC 5626 also mentions the ;reg-id Contact
*header* param. A SIP client could send two REGISTER indicating same
;+sip.instance value and different ;reg-id values (1 and 2). When the
registrar receives a request for the registered AoR it retrieves a
single binding for all those existing bindings sharing ;+sip.instance,
probably the binding with reg-id=1. If the connection is closed, then
the registrar removes that binding and performs failover by using the
binding with ;reg-id=2.
So, even for same +sip.instance value can be several contact records, but
with different reg-id?