Your right, of course. Using DNS SRV for reliability has its limitations. The idea is to combine various methods to come as close as you can get. I assume that your statement is based on how RFC3263 specifies handling of outbound server going down mid-dialog? g-)
Ritesh Jalan wrote:
Hi
DNS SRV is a Load Balance system, How it can be a fail over.
Only for call initialisation a UAC will search for DNS SRV records, but after the the call starts, if First server (From which call is beaing initiated) goes down then thebye message will not go to second server
net4.in Ritesh Jalan Senior Engineer - Business Solution Net4India Ltd. D-25 Sector - 3 Noida - 201301 India Tel: 91-120-5323500 Mobile: 91-9818616329 Fax: 91-120-5323520 MSN: ritesh_jalan@hotmail.com mailto:ritesh_jalan@hotmail.com URL: http://www.net4.in
----- Original Message ----- *From:* samuel <mailto:samu60@gmail.com> *To:* G. Jacobsen <mailto:g_jacobsen@yahoo.co.uk> *Cc:* seruser List <mailto:serusers@iptel.org> *Sent:* Friday, July 07, 2006 2:00 PM *Subject:* Re: [Serusers] Global Failover Server Following lines are an extract from the SIPit preliminary report regarding supported DNS features in current implementations: >160 people from 16 countries attended SIPit 18 with *73* different SIP implementations: >Full 3263 25 >3263 (no naptr,SRV on) 13 >A only 22 >IP only (no DNS) 9 Which gives a percentage of 38/73 supporting SRV records, so more or less half of the implementations supports this type of load balancing. This value should be used with care because implementations include both UAs and proxies/redirect/* servers. I can also say that a higher percentage of desktop SIP phones supports DNS SRVs, but since it's just my impression from the ones I have touched I can not assure nor give a percentage... Hope it helps, Samuel. 2006/7/6, G.Jacobsen < g_jacobsen@yahoo.co.uk <mailto:g_jacobsen@yahoo.co.uk>>: Samuel, Do you happen to know what percentage of UAs out there are really "Compliant" UAs ? My impression so far regarding SRV DNS records is that they are theoretically a nice feature but unfortunately almost useless since one needs to cater for those non-compliant UAs anyway. I would love to be convinced of the contrary. Can anyone supply real usage figures regarding compliant/non-compliant UAS ? TIA Gerry -----Original Message----- *From:* serusers-bounces@lists.iptel.org <mailto:serusers-bounces@lists.iptel.org>[mailto: serusers-bounces@lists.iptel.org <mailto:serusers-bounces@lists.iptel.org>]*On Behalf Of *samuel *Sent:* Donnerstag, 6. Juli 2006 14:52 *To:* Ritesh Jalan *Cc:* seruser List *Subject:* [Bulk] Re: [Serusers] Global Failover Server Look at RFC 3623. Cofigure two SRV entries in your DNS, one pointing to the UAS SERver and another to the UK server. "Compliant" UAs will try to contact the other proxy upon failure of their current one. Samuel. 2006/7/5, Ritesh Jalan <ritesh.j@net4.in <mailto:ritesh.j@net4.in>>: Hi All Pls. guide me how can we implement failover on SIP Server located globally, Like one server in USA another in UK. Ritesh Jalan Mobile: 91-9818616329 MSN: ritesh_jalan@hotmail.com <mailto:ritesh_jalan@hotmail.com> _______________________________________________ Serusers mailing list Serusers@lists.iptel.org <mailto:Serusers@lists.iptel.org> http://lists.iptel.org/mailman/listinfo/serusers _______________________________________________ Serusers mailing list Serusers@lists.iptel.org <mailto:Serusers@lists.iptel.org> http://lists.iptel.org/mailman/listinfo/serusers ------------------------------------------------------------------------ _______________________________________________ Serusers mailing list Serusers@lists.iptel.org http://lists.iptel.org/mailman/listinfo/serusers
Serusers mailing list Serusers@lists.iptel.org http://lists.iptel.org/mailman/listinfo/serusers