<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
</head>
<body>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 02/09/2020 19.30, Patrick Wakano
wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:CAPu3kNXc99tdRPo9mCjB-bWdKp-T+hM_iosefrqVOufvyercWw@mail.gmail.com">
<meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
<div dir="ltr">
<div>Hello list,</div>
<div>Hope you are all well.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
Under some load test simulations I've been facing cases where
the command Kamailio sends to RTPEngine times out with such
message:<br>
<div><span style="font-family:monospace">send_rtpp_command():
timeout waiting reply for command "" from RTP proxy</span></div>
<div>After checking RTPEngine logs, I can see the command was
received and a reply was sent, so I am thinking the reply
packet could have been lost somewhere in the network (they are
in different servers). So my question is, how resilient is the
RTPEngine NG protocol to handle packet loss situations? I saw
TCP is not supported, so are there UDP retransmissions in
place to guarantee packet delivery? Any ideas to make this
connection more reliable?</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<p>The module automatically resends the command a number of times if
no reply was received within the timeout period. The modparam
`rtpengine_retr` is how many times a command is resent, and
`rtpengine_tout_ms` is how long it waits (in ms) each time for a
reply.</p>
<p>If you don't get a reply even after multiple retries, you might
have an underlying network issue. Most often this is due to broken
IP fragmentation in the network.<br>
</p>
<p>We're currently working on adding HTTP and Websocket support to
rtpengine, so this could be used in the future as control protocol
from Kamailio instead of UDP, even though in a properly
functioning network there's no reason why UDP shouldn't be as
reliable as TCP.</p>
<p>Cheers<br>
</p>
</body>
</html>