7 Apr
2005
7 Apr
'05
5:24 p.m.
Hi Greger,
I enjoy reading your posts, thanks a lot for the great work you are doing for ser users!
I am going to consider that kind of scenario as well (load balancer returning Virtual IP
address). I think for such configuration server side has to keep session information and
always forward a call to the right server.
"Greger V. Teigre" <greger(a)teigre.com> wrote:
I was thinking about a load balancing scenario where the load balancer will replace the IP
addresses.
g-)
---- Original Message ----
From: Tina
To: Greger V. Teigre
Sent: Wednesday, April 06, 2005 09:45 PM
Subject: Re: [Serusers] still no help - usrloc synchronization
Thank you for givingme the scenario with
"restricted IP" NAT, I am
starting to find some acceptable solution.
Unfortunately, "one-public-IP" approach is not free from problems
also. If your SIP router inserts this "one-public-IP" into the VIA
header, the reply routing goes via wrong SIP server...
If your SIP server inserts its real-IP-address - the scenario
mentioned above is still not resolved.
Any comments?
Tina
"Greger V. Teigre" <greger(a)teigre.com> wrote:
See inline.
---------------------------------
Yahoo! Messenger
Show us what our next emoticon should look like. Join the fun.
If you use DNS server for load balancing... the
client receives one
of your domain IP addresses according to SRV. I don't see the problem
with a call here, cause UAC asks the address only once (before
sending INVITE). UAC already has the IP for BYE/reINVITEs. So why
would you replicate INVITEs?
I would never replicate INVITEs, I would just make sure that they are
proxied through the correct SER server (i.e. IP).
The problems depends on your setup. If you have SERs with different
IPs, ex UA1 has registered with server A and UA2 has registered with
server B: If UA2 wants to call UA1 and UA is behind an IP restricted
NAT, server A is stored in the NAT table of the NAT in front of UA1.
If server B sends an INVITE to UA1, the INVITE will be refused by
UA1's NAT.
This is why a "one public IP" in front of a load balancing
cluster probably is a good way to go.
If you use IPVS/LVS... I believe you can force
SER to insert it's
public IP into VIA, so there is no problem with replies. With regard
to another requests, I believe load balancer keeps connection
template, then when another request comes it would be forwarded to
the same ser.
Yes. There are different "keys" to use to load balance SIP messages.
One good way from a NAT point of view is to use originating IP
address. What you must remember is that the problem is not on the
server side, but on the client side. The NAT will in many situations
stop incoming UDP packets if the originating ip:port is not already
stored in the NAT table. The Via header does not matter for the NAT.
g-)
Any comments?
"Greger V. Teigre" <greger(a)teigre.com> wrote:
Yes, I believe that is so. But still you get a problem if the NAT is
restricted, port-restricted or symmetric... The best would be to load
balance and always make sure that a given client is handled through a
given
SER (REGISTER and INVITEs). That includes forwarding INVITEs from one
SER to
another... OR you must load balance in front of your servers with one
common
public IP.
g-)
Matt Schulte wrote:
Do you Yahoo!?
Better first dates. More second dates. Yahoo! Personals Ack, I didn't even think about NAT. Would
these be added before it
gets sent off to the second proxy? ie:
if (!src_ip==blah.netlogic.net) {
add_rcv_param();
t_replicate("blah.netlogic.net", "999");
};
-----Original Message-----
From: Greger V. Teigre [mailto:greger@teigre.com]
Sent: Tuesday, April 05, 2005 7:49 AM
To: Matt Schulte; kramarv(a)yahoo.com
! ; Cc: serusers(a)lists.iptel.org
Subject: Re: [Serusers] still no help - usrloc synchronization
Well, you still have the NAT issues unless you do load balancing and
your
SER servers have the same public IP.
Have you looked at 0.9.0 nathelper function add_rcv_param() ? It
will add received info to the contact header for the other SER to
process. Haven't really tried yet...
g-)
Matt Schulte wrote:
Yahoo! Messenger
Show us what our next emoticon should look like. Join the fun. I'm starting to lean this direction, using
t_replicate and all. I
could never get usrloc (db mode) to function properly.. t_replicate
is
> a dirty but very effective workaround.
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Greger V. Teigre [mailto:greger@teigre.com]
> Sent: Saturday, April 02, 2005 1:33 AM
> To: kramarv(a)yahoo.com
> Cc: serusers(a)lists.iptel.org
> Subject: Re: [Serusers] still ! no help - usrloc synchronization
>
>
> Have a look at this thread:
> http://lists.iptel.org/pipermail/serusers/2005-January/014669.html
> g-)
>
> Java Rockx wrote:
>> Tina,
>>
>> I thought I saw you post the other day that you did not want to
>> use t_replicate(), however, this is probably your best bet to
>> getting this
>
>> to work, IMHO.
>>
>> Regards,
>> Paul
>>
>> On Apr 1, 2005 4:08 PM, Tina wrote:
> ! >>
>>> Hi, please help me, I'm stuck with it!!!!!
>>> I am trying to set up several sers with a shared MySQL database
>>> for location service.
>>>
>>> I set in each ser.cfg:
>>>
>>> modparam("usrloc", "db_mode", 2)
>>> modparam("usrloc",
>>> "db_url","sql://ser:heslo@192.168.25.163/ser")
>>>
>>> and the servers are not synchronized.
>>> The I set
>>> modparam("usrloc", "db_mode", 2)
>>>
>>>
>>> made UAC (Xlite) register to one of the servers.
>>> I see it via usrloc, but there is no record in "location" mySQL
>>> table....So others do not see the client and I'm unable to make
>>> calls....
>>>
>>>
>>> Please help how to work with usrloc and mySQL...
>>>
>>> Tina,
>>> software engineer
>>>
>>> ________________________________
>>> Do you Yahoo!?
>>> Better first dates. More second dates. Yahoo! Personals
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Serusers mailing list
>>> serusers(a)lists.iptel.org
>>> http://lists.iptel.org/mailman/listinfo/serusers
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Serusers mailing list
>> serusers(a)lists.iptel.org http://lists.iptel.org/mailman/listinfo/serusers
>
> _______________________________________________
> Serusers mailing list
> serusers(a)lists.iptel.org http://lists.iptel.org/mailman/listinfo/serusers