27 Mar
2006
27 Mar
'06
10:28 a.m.
Hi Andy, Hi Bogdan,
@first: Thank you for your replies.
I agree, i SHOULD do Record-Route with the Proxy-IP and loose-Route
either on the LB or on the Proxies (for consistency). But i cannot...
I need to do record_route on the proxies (for add_rr_param) and i need
to do loose_routing on the Proxies for accounting (i do not want to it
on the LB).
Any hint, any how-to?
Carsten
Bogdan-Andrei Iancu schrieb:
Hi Andy,
yes, right...it's a matter of choice...
what I was trying to say is that the consistency should be kept and do
record and loose route on same device with proper IP: either do RR on
LB with LB's IP and loose also on LB, either do them on proxy with
proxies's IP.
regards,
bogdan
Andreas Granig wrote:
se
Bogdan-Andrei Iancu wrote:
just a short note...on the sip proxy you should
do rr with the
proxy's IP and not with the one of the LB. Once the LB decides which
proxy handles the call, all sequential request must go through that
proxy and ideally to skip the LB.
Well, I personally prefer to do rr on the LB, because you can then
perform a failover to another proxy on the LB if the specific proxy
fails. Think of a scenario where LB routes the INVITE transaction to
proxy P1 selected by Call-ID hashing, and after successful
call-establishment P1 fails. If the BYE then hits LB, it will try to
route it to P1 again because of the same Call-ID, and after hitting a
timeout, a fallback to P2 can be performed. So no failover has to be
implemented in the UACs.
For accounting purposes, the acc-records can be collected from all of
the proxies to create the CDRs.
Just my 2 cents,
Andy