28 Nov
2012
28 Nov
'12
7:01 p.m.
Hi again and thank you for your help,
This is what happened when I changed the flags to 8 and restarted both kamailios
ACTIVE KAMAILIO
SET_NO:: 2
SET:: 2
URI:: sip:10.2.45.103:5060 flags=AP priority=1 attrs=
SET:: 1
URI:: sip:10.2.45.98:5060 flags=AP priority=1 attrs=
PASSIVE KAMAILIO
SET_NO:: 1
SET:: 1
URI:: sip:10.2.45.103:5060 flags=IP priority=1 attrs=
URI:: sip:10.2.45.98:5060 flags=IP priority=1 attrs=
When I stop kamailio 1 kamailio two takes the Virtual IP and
everything works like a charm, when I start kamailio 1 again the same
issue appears calls are only routed to the 10.2.45.103 asterisk....
What might be the problem that they are in different set ?
On 28 November 2012 18:37, SamyGo <govoiper(a)gmail.com> wrote:
Well these are two different dispatcher groups, one is SET:1 10.2.45.98
where the calls are routed - the other one is SET:2 which you are definitely
not calling in your ds_select() function.
Also the flags=IP are, I think, saying that asterisk servers are inactive
and kamailio is probing them, not sure about it. mine always show me
flags=AP for active servers.
Also how have you defined the
ds_ping_reply_codes
http://www.kamailio.net/docs/modules/3.2.x/modules_k/dispatcher.html#id2495…
Parameter such that if asterisk responds with a 484 or 404 or anyother
negative response to the dispatcher OPTIONS SIP ping then consider it
active.
Hope this will get your issue resolved.
The thing is the dispatcher in kamailio or load-balancer in OpenSIPS both
set the Initial flags of all the servers in the table to Active/Enabled !
that means if I have a server which is down and I reload the dispatcher
module it will mark that down server to UP and my calls will timeout trying
to send calls to that instance !
Thanks,
Sammy
On Wed, Nov 28, 2012 at 9:25 PM, Rumen Mihailov <zealas1662(a)gmail.com>
wrote:
Hello Samy,
this is what I got:
SET_NO:: 2
SET:: 2
URI:: sip:10.2.45.103:5060 flags=IP priority=1 attrs=
SET:: 1
URI:: sip:10.2.45.98:5060 flags=IP priority=1 attrs=
on both machines. Moreover now without any changes dispatcher is not
working at all. Only sending calls to the asterisk-1 (10.2.45.98)
On 28 November 2012 18:20, SamyGo <govoiper(a)gmail.com> wrote:
_______________________________________________
SIP Express Router (SER) and Kamailio (OpenSER) - sr-users mailing list
sr-users(a)lists.sip-router.org
http://lists.sip-router.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sr-users
Hi again,
I think instead of dispatcher show use "kamctl dispatcher dump" That
will
show you the kamailio status of these servers. The flag 0, I'm not sure
about that I always use 8 to re-activate the server if the ping gets
back.
Hope to hear from you
--
Sammy
On Wed, Nov 28, 2012 at 8:57 PM, Rumen Mihailov <zealas1662(a)gmail.com>
wrote:
_______________________________________________
SIP Express Router (SER) and Kamailio (OpenSER) - sr-users mailing list
sr-users(a)lists.sip-router.org
http://lists.sip-router.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sr-users
Hello again,
I was able to perform tests and this is the output:
Kamailio-1: 10.2.45.106
Kamailio-2: 10.2.45.109
Asterisk-1: 10.2.45.98
Asterisk-2: 10.2.45.103
I can ping both asterisks from both kamailios
here are stats:
FROM KAMAILIO-1
[root@kamailio-1 ~]# ping 10.2.45.98
PING 10.2.45.98 (10.2.45.98) 56(84) bytes of data.
64 bytes from 10.2.45.98: icmp_seq=1 ttl=64 time=0.315 ms
^C
--- 10.2.45.98 ping statistics ---
1 packets transmitted, 1 received, 0% packet loss, time 773ms
rtt min/avg/max/mdev = 0.315/0.315/0.315/0.000 ms
[root@kamailio-1 ~]# ping 10.2.45.103
PING 10.2.45.103 (10.2.45.103) 56(84) bytes of data.
64 bytes from 10.2.45.103: icmp_seq=1 ttl=64 time=0.489 ms
64 bytes from 10.2.45.103: icmp_seq=2 ttl=64 time=0.268 ms
FROM KAMAILIO-2
[root@kamailio-2 ~]# ping 10.2.45.98
PING 10.2.45.98 (10.2.45.98) 56(84) bytes of data.
64 bytes from 10.2.45.98: icmp_seq=1 ttl=64 time=1.46 ms
64 bytes from 10.2.45.98: icmp_seq=2 ttl=64 time=0.324 ms
^C
--- 10.2.45.98 ping statistics ---
2 packets transmitted, 2 received, 0% packet loss, time 1036ms
rtt min/avg/max/mdev = 0.324/0.893/1.462/0.569 ms
[root@kamailio-2 ~]# ping 10.2.45.103
PING 10.2.45.103 (10.2.45.103) 56(84) bytes of data.
64 bytes from 10.2.45.103: icmp_seq=1 ttl=64 time=2.09 ms
64 bytes from 10.2.45.103: icmp_seq=2 ttl=64 time=0.350 ms
^C
Those are the 'kamctl dispatcher show' outputs:
KAMAILIO 1
[root@kamailio-1 ~]# kamctl dispatcher show
dispatcher gateways
+----+-------+----------------------+-------+----------+-------+-------------------+
| id | setid | destination | flags | priority | attrs |
description |
+----+-------+----------------------+-------+----------+-------+-------------------+
| 1 | 1 | sip:10.2.45.98:5060 | 0 | 1 | |
asterisk-1 |
| 2 | 1 | sip:10.2.45.103:5060 | 0 | 1 | |
asterisk-2 |
+----+-------+----------------------+-------+----------+-------+-------------------+
KAMAILIO 2
[root@kamailio-2 ~]# kamctl dispatcher show
dispatcher gateways
+----+-------+----------------------+-------+----------+-------+-------------------+
| id | setid | destination | flags | priority | attrs |
description |
+----+-------+----------------------+-------+----------+-------+-------------------+
| 1 | 1 | sip:10.2.45.98:5060 | 0 | 1 | |
asterisk-1 |
| 2 | 1 | sip:10.2.45.103:5060 | 0 | 1 | |
asterisk-2 |
+----+-------+----------------------+-------+----------+-------+-------------------+
Both asterisks can also ping both kamailios
ds_select_dst("1","4");
this is what I have in my route[TOASTERISK]
Any thought guys ?
Best regards,
Rumen
On 28 November 2012 09:55, Rumen Mihailov <zealas1662(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> Hello Samy,
>
> Thank you for the hint, I will test later today and let you know the
> results.
>
> Best regards,
> Rumen
>
> On 28 November 2012 07:00, SamyGo <govoiper(a)gmail.com> wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> Just few quick questions , can you ping the second asterisk from
>> secondary
>> Kamailio ? what is the routing set for that. Does your second
>> asterisk
>> box
>> gets inactive in dispatcher show command after 30 seconds ?
>> Mine worked fine, the key is the linux routing table.
>>
>> BR
>> Sammy
>>
>>
>> On Tue, Nov 27, 2012 at 7:29 PM, Rumen Mihailov
>> <zealas1662(a)gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> .s. Thank you for creating such a wonderful product. Thank you !!!
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> SIP Express Router (SER) and Kamailio (OpenSER) - sr-users mailing
>> list
>> sr-users(a)lists.sip-router.org
>> http://lists.sip-router.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sr-users
>>
_______________________________________________
SIP Express Router (SER) and Kamailio (OpenSER) - sr-users mailing list
sr-users(a)lists.sip-router.org
http://lists.sip-router.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sr-users
_______________________________________________
SIP Express Router (SER) and Kamailio (OpenSER) - sr-users mailing list
sr-users(a)lists.sip-router.org
http://lists.sip-router.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sr-users