3 Jul
2009
3 Jul
'09
12:27 a.m.
Hello.
I was reading this thread and it seems to me very interesting. In fact, I was looking for
a parameter that would let me mark a gateway as down and then avoid the LCR module keep
sending calls to it.
So just to clarify this topic.
If I'm using Kamailio 1.5.1 with LCR in front of several gateways, and one of them
goes down. The gateway is marked as down? Isn't?
What parameter controls the "ping" to the gateways?. Can I set a gateway down
manually?.
I'm using "fr_timer" to 3, is this a problem?
Thanks in advance.
Regards,
Ricardo Martinez.-
-----Mensaje original-----
De: users-bounces(a)lists.kamailio.org [mailto:users-bounces@lists.kamailio.org] En nombre
de Iñaki Baz Castillo
Enviado el: lunes, 23 de marzo de 2009 6:54
Para: Alexandr Dubovikov
CC: kamailio
Asunto: Re: [Kamailio-Users] [LCR] About ping
2009/3/23 Alexandr Dubovikov <shurik(a)start4.info>fo>:
On Mon, Mar 23, 2009 at 11:15:52AM +0100, Iñaki Baz
Castillo wrote:
don't forget to disable ping for this gateway, because finaly you will have
a DDOS effect of the "offline" gw. :-)
Well, If the host is already offline then it doesn't matter to kill it more XD
Thanks.
--
Iñaki Baz Castillo
<ibc(a)aliax.net>
_______________________________________________
Kamailio (OpenSER) - Users mailing list
Users(a)lists.kamailio.org
http://lists.kamailio.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users
http://lists.openser-project.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users
2009/4/1 Alexandr Dubovikov
<shurik(a)start4.info>fo>:
> On Fri, Mar 20, 2009 at 10:21:20PM +0100, Andreas Heise wrote:
>> Hello Iñaki,
Hi Inaki,
Hi all,
Thanks for pointing it out.
However, if a gw takes so long time (~32 seconds) to respond I prefer
to consider it as "offline" :)
you should ask Alexandr he has introdused this feature with rev5452,
but I'm not sure if he is on the lists all the time, so I'll forward your
question
to him...
sorry, I am currently offline and couldn't answer directly to the list.
anyway. I agreed, 180 seconds it's too big ping interval, but it couldn't be
also less 32 seconds.
http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc3261.txt
17.2.2 Non-INVITE Server Transaction
T1 = 500 ms.
Timer J 64*T1 for UDP Section 17.2.2 Wait time for
0s for TCP/SCTP non-INVITE request
so, the timer for "completed" is 32 seconds and couldn't be less.
of course, you can use less value, but on own risk :-)
RFC 3261 are not recommendet it :)