16 May
2007
16 May
'07
6:56 p.m.
I'm sorry but I don't know enough about the internals . Maybe Andrei (DNS)
and Dragos (openIMS) can help with it.
Probably the most important lines of the log are:
[00m 1(17870) [01;30mdns_hash_find(scscf.open-ims.test(19), 1), h=915
[00m 1(17870) [01;30mdns_a_resovle(scscf.open-ims.test, 0) returning 0
[00m 1(17870)
[01;30mdns_srv_resolve_ip("_sip._udp.scscf.open-ims.test", 0, 0),
ret=0, ip=127.0.0.1
[00m 1(17870) [01;30mdns_sip_resolve(scscf.open-ims.test, 0, 0), srv0, ret=0
It looks like there's only one returning record...while in the DNS there are
two.
Try to post last message to openims and serdev lists and maybe developers
can help with it...
Just for trying, can you add a second fake SRV entry differing not only in
the port but also in the hostname?
Luck,
Samuel.
2007/5/16, Mário Ferreira <mariojvp(a)gmail.com>om>:
Hi,
I tried with SER version ser 2.1.0-dev1, with dns cache and failover
compile options, and with use_dns_cache and
use_dns_failover turned on in the config files ( of P and I-CSCF, the
previous hop of S-CSCF) , but it doesn't work.
I attached the log corresponding to the REGISTER reception by I-CSCF and
delivery to S-CSCF.
I have two S-CSCFs and when i kill one, the message never goes to the
other S-CSCF.
Thanks,
Mário Ferreira
On 5/14/07, Mário Ferreira <mariojvp(a)gmail.com> wrote:
Hi,
The SER version was updated, but only in the trunk of openimscore, and i
had a working copy of a branch (with the old SER version) .
Now, i have checked out the trunk and i will test it soon.
Thanks,
Mário Ferreira
On 5/14/07, samuel < samu60(a)gmail.com> wrote:
It looks like SER is compiled with all compilation flags for DNS
failover... are these features set in the config file?
I guess you're using openIMS SER branch, isn't it? I don't know if it
has been sync with latest SER 2.0 and I can not assure whether ser
0.10.99-dev53-tm_fixes has SRV failover support (which I think it does
althought with maybe some bugs).
From the dig output I guess you're trying to load balance between the
two servers responding for scscf.open-ims.test, isn't it?
Can you please attach the log file section where SER is trying to send
to this destination?
Thanks,
Samuel
2007/5/14, Mário Ferreira < mariojvp(a)gmail.com>gt;:
Hi,
# ser -V
version: ser 0.10.99-dev53-tm_fixes (i386/linux)
flags: STATS: Off, USE_IPV6, USE_TCP, DISABLE_NAGLE, USE_MCAST,
DNS_IP_HACK, SHM_MEM, SHM_MMAP, PKG_MALLOC, DBG_QM_MALLOC,
FAST_LOCK-ADAPTIVE_WAIT, USE_DNS_CACHE, USE_DNS_FAILOVER, USE_DST_BLACKLIST
ADAPTIVE_WAIT_LOOPS=1024, MAX_RECV_BUFFER_SIZE 262144, MAX_LISTEN
16, MAX_URI_SIZE 1024, BUF_SIZE 65535
poll method support: poll, epoll_lt, epoll_et, sigio_rt, select.
@(#) $Id: main.c 136 2007-02-13 17:58:42Z vingarzan $
main.c compiled on 22:49:24 Mar 26 2007 with gcc 3.4.6
# dig NAPTR open-ims.test
; <<>> DiG 9.2.4 <<>> NAPTR open-ims.test
;; global options: printcmd
;; Got answer:
;; ->>HEADER<<- opcode: QUERY, status: NOERROR, id: 56440
;; flags: qr aa rd ra; QUERY: 1, ANSWER: 2, AUTHORITY: 1,
ADDITIONAL: 3
;; QUESTION SECTION:
;open-ims.test. IN NAPTR
;; ANSWER SECTION:
open-ims.test. 86400 IN NAPTR 10 50 "s" "SIP+D2U"
"" _sip._udp.open- ims.test.
open-ims.test. 86400 IN NAPTR 20 50 "s" "SIP+D2T"
"" _sip._tcp.open-ims.test.
;; AUTHORITY SECTION:
open-ims.test. 86400 IN NS
127.0.0.1.open-ims.test .
;; ADDITIONAL SECTION:
icscf.open-ims.test. 86400 IN A 127.0.0.1
_sip._udp.open-ims.test . 86400 IN SRV 0 0 5060
icscf.open-ims.test.
_sip._tcp.open- ims.test. 86400 IN SRV 0 0 5060
icscf.open-ims.test.
;; Query time: 0 msec
;; SERVER: 127.0.0.1#53(127.0.0.1 )
;; WHEN: Mon May 14 18:24:18 2007
;; MSG SIZE rcvd: 259
# dig _sip._udp.scscf.open-ims.test. srv
; <<>> DiG 9.2.4 <<>> _sip._udp.scscf.open-ims.test. srv
;; global options: printcmd
;; Got answer:
;; ->>HEADER<<- opcode: QUERY, status: NOERROR, id: 21445
;; flags: qr aa rd ra; QUERY: 1, ANSWER: 2, AUTHORITY: 1,
ADDITIONAL: 1
;; QUESTION SECTION:
;_sip._udp.scscf.open-ims.test. IN SRV
;; ANSWER SECTION:
_sip._udp.scscf.open-ims.test. 86400 IN SRV 0 1 6060
scscf.open-ims.test.
_sip._udp.scscf.open-ims.test. 86400 IN SRV 0 1 6061
scscf.open-ims.test.
;; AUTHORITY SECTION:
open-ims.test. 86400 IN NS
127.0.0.1.open-ims.test.
;; ADDITIONAL SECTION:
scscf.open-ims.test. 86400 IN A 127.0.0.1
;; Query time: 0 msec
;; SERVER: 127.0.0.1#53( 127.0.0.1)
;; WHEN: Mon May 14 18:26:33 2007
;; MSG SIZE rcvd: 165
regards,
Mário Ferreira
On 5/13/07, samuel <samu60(a)gmail.com> wrote:
>
> I have tried DNS failover and can assert is working like charm for
> SER version 2.0 and further.
> Which SER version are you using?
>
> can you check wheter you have compiled SER with DNS failover?
> which is the ouput of
> #ser -V
> what is the ouput of
> #dig NAPTR yourdomain.name.com
> (replace yourdomain.name.com for the appropriate valie)
>
> regards,
> sam.
>
> 2007/5/10, Mário Ferreira <mariojvp(a)gmail.com >:
> >
> > Hi,
> >
> > I am interested in using SER DNS failover, but I am getting some
> > problems.
> >
> > A failure can be a 503 error response, ICMP errors or a timeout
> > due to a not received response.
> >
> > Does anyone know if SER is able to detect these failures and
> > then select an alternative destination for the message?
> >
> > If the ICMP errors can't be detected, can this be solved with
> > timers?
> > I turned on use_dns_cache and use_dns_failover, but when the
> > message fails to be delivered to the first destination,
> > SER never tries the second destination, which was configured
> > with DNS SRV.
> >
> > regards,
> >
> > Mário Ferreira
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Serusers mailing list
> > Serusers(a)lists.iptel.org
> > http://lists.iptel.org/mailman/listinfo/serusers
> >
> >
>
6401
days inactive
6401
days old
0 comments
1 participants
participants (1)
-
samuel