10 Jul
2009
10 Jul
'09
8:31 a.m.
Pascal Maugeri wrote:
On Wed, Jul 8, 2009 at 5:44 PM, Jiri Kuthan <jiri(a)iptel.org
<mailto:jiri@iptel.org>> wrote:
Pascal Maugeri wrote:
Thanks for the suggestion Jiri. So far I have been monitoring sr
and I know that the TCP async implementation might resolve some
problems we're facing with kamailio.
But I'm a bit conservative and I want to do several
verifications of sr before doing the "switch". So for now we
stick to kamailio.
Does this TCP supervisor process priority sounds familiar to you
for tuning kamailio ?
not really -- I sort of think that studying tuning of something what
is overdue
for an update may cost you lot of time and bring less results.
Sorry Jiri, but I disagree with you : if I understood well kamailio is
still maintained as a product and will see future evolutions. And I'm
pretty sure I will get some new issues to solve if we switch to
sip-router. I need some time before doing this.
Current Kamailio (1.5) is based on ser's old core. Next Kamailio release
will be based on ser's new core (see sip-router.org). This new core has
lots of TCP improvements.
Of course it makes sense to tune Kamailio 1.5 if you need TCP, but there
wont be new features for the old core. New features will be added to
sip-router core, which for sure has better TCP performance (see also the
discussion on the sip-router list:
http://lists.sip-router.org/pipermail/sr-dev/2009-July/002975.html)
regards
Klaus