30 Jun
2016
30 Jun
'16
5:03 p.m.
I am interested in opinions and suggestions about load balancing with
Kamailio. I work for an ITSP that currently uses Oracle & Broadsoft, and I
am working to design and develop an open source solution using Kamailio
(Proxy, Registrar, LB) & other Application/Media servers for more
flexibility and freedom :) Thank you ALL for the work you have put in on
Kamailio!
After much reading and configuration I have a Kamailio 'proxy' setup, with
endpoints registered using the Registrar module, and calls being
sent/received to/from the PSTN. I am interested in separating the Load
Balancers from the Registrars & logic, for security and in order to be able
to scale appropriately. I will be using the dispatcher module for both
load balancers and proxies using the following architecture:
PublicIP = 5.5.5.5; Private IP = 192.168.1.0/24
USERS (Public Internet) ==> (public: 5.5.5.5) [ Kamailio (LoadBalancer,
Firewall, Sanity Checks) ] (core:192.168.1.2) ==> [ Kamailio Registrar,
Proxy, PSTN GW ] ==> AppServers or PSTN GW
(we can access our PSTN gateways Via our Core using Private IPs)
Questions:
1) Is it overkill to separate the LB & Proxy/Registrars?
2) Is this a common architecture & anyone configured this architecture
successfully?
Thanks in advance for your help!
*Daryn Johnson*
*Senior VoIP Engineer*
30 Jun
30 Jun
5:15 p.m.
Hi Daryn,
it may not be an overkill, depending on the constrains you have. For
example if the clients can possibly only be instructed to connect to a
single public IP address (5.5.5.5 in your example), while you want to be
able to scale the Kamailio architecture with multiple instances, then it
can be a viable approach. Remember though that the Load Balancer will be
your Single Point Of Failure. If the Load Balancer dies, for any reason,
the service is not available.
There has been an interesting thread in this mailing list recently, on
techniques to provide active/stand-by redundancy to a Kamailio deployment:
"High Availability".
Depending on the capabilities of the clients you may consider removing the
Load Balancer from the equation and perform DNS-based load balancing across
your Proxy/Registrar/PSTN Gw instances. You'd be removing a SPOF, use one
fewer machine, and simplify the architecture. This is not always possible
to achieve though, because it delegates load balancing and fail over to the
clients.
Giacomo
On 30 June 2016 at 17:03, Daryn Johnson <djohnson(a)telnetww.com> wrote:
I am interested in opinions and suggestions about load
balancing with
Kamailio. I work for an ITSP that currently uses Oracle & Broadsoft, and I
am working to design and develop an open source solution using Kamailio
(Proxy, Registrar, LB) & other Application/Media servers for more
flexibility and freedom :) Thank you ALL for the work you have put in on
Kamailio!
After much reading and configuration I have a Kamailio 'proxy' setup, with
endpoints registered using the Registrar module, and calls being
sent/received to/from the PSTN. I am interested in separating the Load
Balancers from the Registrars & logic, for security and in order to be able
to scale appropriately. I will be using the dispatcher module for both
load balancers and proxies using the following architecture:
PublicIP = 5.5.5.5; Private IP = 192.168.1.0/24
USERS (Public Internet) ==> (public: 5.5.5.5) [ Kamailio (LoadBalancer,
Firewall, Sanity Checks) ] (core:192.168.1.2) ==> [ Kamailio Registrar,
Proxy, PSTN GW ] ==> AppServers or PSTN GW
(we can access our PSTN gateways Via our Core using Private IPs)
Questions:
1) Is it overkill to separate the LB & Proxy/Registrars?
2) Is this a common architecture & anyone configured this architecture
successfully?
Thanks in advance for your help!
*Daryn Johnson*
*Senior VoIP Engineer*
_______________________________________________
SIP Express Router (SER) and Kamailio (OpenSER) - sr-users mailing list
sr-users(a)lists.sip-router.org
http://lists.sip-router.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sr-users
5:18 p.m.
Maybe I'm missing something about the core infrastructure of Kamailio that
makes this impossible, but why does it seem like nobody wants to run
multiple Kamailio load balancers in a cluster? sip.yourcompany.com can have
A/SRV records pointing to multiple IP addresses of separate Kamailio
instances. As long as the edge proxies are either stateless, or
transaction-stateful (i.e. not dialog stateful) this should provide both
availability and scalability at the edge.
Is there something that makes this infeasible in Kamailio?
On Thu, Jun 30, 2016 at 11:15 AM Giacomo Vacca <giacomo.vacca(a)gmail.com>
wrote:
Hi Daryn,
it may not be an overkill, depending on the constrains you have. For
example if the clients can possibly only be instructed to connect to a
single public IP address (5.5.5.5 in your example), while you want to be
able to scale the Kamailio architecture with multiple instances, then it
can be a viable approach. Remember though that the Load Balancer will be
your Single Point Of Failure. If the Load Balancer dies, for any reason,
the service is not available.
There has been an interesting thread in this mailing list recently, on
techniques to provide active/stand-by redundancy to a Kamailio deployment:
"High Availability".
Depending on the capabilities of the clients you may consider removing the
Load Balancer from the equation and perform DNS-based load balancing across
your Proxy/Registrar/PSTN Gw instances. You'd be removing a SPOF, use one
fewer machine, and simplify the architecture. This is not always possible
to achieve though, because it delegates load balancing and fail over to the
clients.
Giacomo
On 30 June 2016 at 17:03, Daryn Johnson <djohnson(a)telnetww.com> wrote:
I am interested in opinions and suggestions about
load balancing with
Kamailio. I work for an ITSP that currently uses Oracle & Broadsoft, and I
am working to design and develop an open source solution using Kamailio
(Proxy, Registrar, LB) & other Application/Media servers for more
flexibility and freedom :) Thank you ALL for the work you have put in on
Kamailio!
After much reading and configuration I have a Kamailio 'proxy' setup,
with endpoints registered using the Registrar module, and calls being
sent/received to/from the PSTN. I am interested in separating the Load
Balancers from the Registrars & logic, for security and in order to be able
to scale appropriately. I will be using the dispatcher module for both
load balancers and proxies using the following architecture:
PublicIP = 5.5.5.5; Private IP = 192.168.1.0/24
USERS (Public Internet) ==> (public: 5.5.5.5) [ Kamailio (LoadBalancer,
Firewall, Sanity Checks) ] (core:192.168.1.2) ==> [ Kamailio Registrar,
Proxy, PSTN GW ] ==> AppServers or PSTN GW
(we can access our PSTN gateways Via our Core using Private IPs)
Questions:
1) Is it overkill to separate the LB & Proxy/Registrars?
2) Is this a common architecture & anyone configured this architecture
successfully?
Thanks in advance for your help!
*Daryn Johnson*
*Senior VoIP Engineer*
_______________________________________________
SIP Express Router (SER) and Kamailio (OpenSER) - sr-users mailing list
sr-users(a)lists.sip-router.org
http://lists.sip-router.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sr-users
_______________________________________________
SIP Express Router (SER) and Kamailio (OpenSER) - sr-users mailing list
sr-users(a)lists.sip-router.org
http://lists.sip-router.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sr-users
5:49 p.m.
Collin,
My apologies for the lack of clarity. We are desiring to use multiple sets
of each task (Load Balancer) (Proxy Registrar) (App Servers). My main
reason for the post and inquiry is to determine if separating the roles to
multiple machine(s) is a common architecture, and if there are any
suggestions in doing this.
Your response actually points me in the right direction though - using
stateless/transaction-stateful Kamailio instances as edge proxies
*Daryn Johnson*
*Senior VoIP Engineer*
248.485.1109
*www.telnetww.com* <http://www.telnetww.com>
1175 W. Long Lake Rd. | Suite 101 | Troy, MI 48098
On Thu, Jun 30, 2016 at 11:18 AM, Colin Morelli <colin.morelli(a)gmail.com>
wrote:
Maybe I'm missing something about the core
infrastructure of Kamailio that
makes this impossible, but why does it seem like nobody wants to run
multiple Kamailio load balancers in a cluster? sip.yourcompany.com can
have A/SRV records pointing to multiple IP addresses of separate Kamailio
instances. As long as the edge proxies are either stateless, or
transaction-stateful (i.e. not dialog stateful) this should provide both
availability and scalability at the edge.
Is there something that makes this infeasible in Kamailio?
On Thu, Jun 30, 2016 at 11:15 AM Giacomo Vacca <giacomo.vacca(a)gmail.com>
wrote:
Hi Daryn,
it may not be an overkill, depending on the constrains you have. For
example if the clients can possibly only be instructed to connect to a
single public IP address (5.5.5.5 in your example), while you want to be
able to scale the Kamailio architecture with multiple instances, then it
can be a viable approach. Remember though that the Load Balancer will be
your Single Point Of Failure. If the Load Balancer dies, for any reason,
the service is not available.
There has been an interesting thread in this mailing list recently, on
techniques to provide active/stand-by redundancy to a Kamailio deployment:
"High Availability".
Depending on the capabilities of the clients you may consider removing
the Load Balancer from the equation and perform DNS-based load balancing
across your Proxy/Registrar/PSTN Gw instances. You'd be removing a SPOF,
use one fewer machine, and simplify the architecture. This is not always
possible to achieve though, because it delegates load balancing and fail
over to the clients.
Giacomo
On 30 June 2016 at 17:03, Daryn Johnson <djohnson(a)telnetww.com> wrote:
_______________________________________________
SIP Express Router (SER) and Kamailio (OpenSER) - sr-users mailing list
sr-users(a)lists.sip-router.org
http://lists.sip-router.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sr-users
I am interested in opinions and suggestions about
load balancing with
Kamailio. I work for an ITSP that currently uses Oracle & Broadsoft, and I
am working to design and develop an open source solution using Kamailio
(Proxy, Registrar, LB) & other Application/Media servers for more
flexibility and freedom :) Thank you ALL for the work you have put in on
Kamailio!
After much reading and configuration I have a Kamailio 'proxy' setup,
with endpoints registered using the Registrar module, and calls being
sent/received to/from the PSTN. I am interested in separating the Load
Balancers from the Registrars & logic, for security and in order to be able
to scale appropriately. I will be using the dispatcher module for both
load balancers and proxies using the following architecture:
PublicIP = 5.5.5.5; Private IP = 192.168.1.0/24
USERS (Public Internet) ==> (public: 5.5.5.5) [ Kamailio (LoadBalancer,
Firewall, Sanity Checks) ] (core:192.168.1.2) ==> [ Kamailio Registrar,
Proxy, PSTN GW ] ==> AppServers or PSTN GW
(we can access our PSTN gateways Via our Core using Private IPs)
Questions:
1) Is it overkill to separate the LB & Proxy/Registrars?
2) Is this a common architecture & anyone configured this architecture
successfully?
Thanks in advance for your help!
*Daryn Johnson*
*Senior VoIP Engineer*
_______________________________________________
SIP Express Router (SER) and Kamailio (OpenSER) - sr-users mailing list
sr-users(a)lists.sip-router.org
http://lists.sip-router.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sr-users
_______________________________________________
SIP Express Router (SER) and Kamailio (OpenSER) - sr-users mailing list
sr-users(a)lists.sip-router.org
http://lists.sip-router.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sr-users
5:55 p.m.
On Thu, Jun 30, 2016 at 03:18:11PM +0000, Colin Morelli wrote:
Maybe I'm missing something about the core
infrastructure of Kamailio that
makes this impossible, but why does it seem like nobody wants to run
multiple Kamailio load balancers in a cluster? sip.yourcompany.com can have
A/SRV records pointing to multiple IP addresses of separate Kamailio
instances. As long as the edge proxies are either stateless, or
transaction-stateful (i.e. not dialog stateful) this should provide both
availability and scalability at the edge.
This works perfectly with kamailio (running 3 loadbalancers for the
outside world, thish are in a keepalived failover so 6 machines for
loadbalancing to 3 backends).
5:43 p.m.
Thank you Giacomo for the info!
We are thinking to use DNS SRV for failover and to use multiple LBs and do
some sort of HA on the Load Balancer(s) using keepalived or etcd, etc....
One of my marching orders is to eliminate any single point of failures.
Using one set of hosts would definitely simplify my architecture. Are there
any security concerns that arise when allowing the LB/Proxy/Registrar/GW to
be on the same device and connected to the Public Internet?
*Daryn Johnson*
*Senior VoIP Engineer*
248.485.1109
*www.telnetww.com* <http://www.telnetww.com>
1175 W. Long Lake Rd. | Suite 101 | Troy, MI 48098
On Thu, Jun 30, 2016 at 11:15 AM, Giacomo Vacca <giacomo.vacca(a)gmail.com>
wrote:
Hi Daryn,
it may not be an overkill, depending on the constrains you have. For
example if the clients can possibly only be instructed to connect to a
single public IP address (5.5.5.5 in your example), while you want to be
able to scale the Kamailio architecture with multiple instances, then it
can be a viable approach. Remember though that the Load Balancer will be
your Single Point Of Failure. If the Load Balancer dies, for any reason,
the service is not available.
There has been an interesting thread in this mailing list recently, on
techniques to provide active/stand-by redundancy to a Kamailio deployment:
"High Availability".
Depending on the capabilities of the clients you may consider removing the
Load Balancer from the equation and perform DNS-based load balancing across
your Proxy/Registrar/PSTN Gw instances. You'd be removing a SPOF, use one
fewer machine, and simplify the architecture. This is not always possible
to achieve though, because it delegates load balancing and fail over to the
clients.
Giacomo
On 30 June 2016 at 17:03, Daryn Johnson <djohnson(a)telnetww.com> wrote:
I am interested in opinions and suggestions about
load balancing with
Kamailio. I work for an ITSP that currently uses Oracle & Broadsoft, and I
am working to design and develop an open source solution using Kamailio
(Proxy, Registrar, LB) & other Application/Media servers for more
flexibility and freedom :) Thank you ALL for the work you have put in on
Kamailio!
After much reading and configuration I have a Kamailio 'proxy' setup,
with endpoints registered using the Registrar module, and calls being
sent/received to/from the PSTN. I am interested in separating the Load
Balancers from the Registrars & logic, for security and in order to be able
to scale appropriately. I will be using the dispatcher module for both
load balancers and proxies using the following architecture:
PublicIP = 5.5.5.5; Private IP = 192.168.1.0/24
USERS (Public Internet) ==> (public: 5.5.5.5) [ Kamailio (LoadBalancer,
Firewall, Sanity Checks) ] (core:192.168.1.2) ==> [ Kamailio Registrar,
Proxy, PSTN GW ] ==> AppServers or PSTN GW
(we can access our PSTN gateways Via our Core using Private IPs)
Questions:
1) Is it overkill to separate the LB & Proxy/Registrars?
2) Is this a common architecture & anyone configured this architecture
successfully?
Thanks in advance for your help!
*Daryn Johnson*
*Senior VoIP Engineer*
_______________________________________________
SIP Express Router (SER) and Kamailio (OpenSER) - sr-users mailing list
sr-users(a)lists.sip-router.org
http://lists.sip-router.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sr-users
_______________________________________________
SIP Express Router (SER) and Kamailio (OpenSER) - sr-users mailing list
sr-users(a)lists.sip-router.org
http://lists.sip-router.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sr-users
5:49 p.m.
On Thu, Jun 30, 2016 at 05:15:19PM +0200, Giacomo Vacca wrote:
Remember though that the Load Balancer will be
your Single Point Of Failure. If the Load Balancer dies, for any reason,
the service is not available.
...
Depending on the capabilities of the clients you may
consider removing the
Load Balancer from the equation and perform DNS-based load balancing across
your Proxy/Registrar/PSTN Gw instances. You'd be removing a SPOF, use one
fewer machine, and simplify the architecture. This is not always possible
to achieve though, because it delegates load balancing and fail over to the
clients.
Clients are to stupid to do this, you have to target the lowest common
denominator which only connect to a single ip. The loadbalancer is one
of the most simple possible config of kamailio possible (dispatcher and
path).
So if you worry (rightly so) about a single point of failure in the
loadbalancer setup, make that one redundant by using a failover
mechanisme (heartbeat/keepalive/whatever). And having multiple instances
of this setup to use DNS based loadbalancing or simple primary/secondary
endpoints for the clients to connect to make any kind of failover
mechanisme for any type of client possible. The resources needed for a
loadbalancer are the least of all machines needed.
5:56 p.m.
Daryn,
That response was more general, not necessarily directed at you!
DNS-based load balancing has always been problematic for clients. They tend
to not properly balance across SRV records, or failover to secondary A
records.
However, I think the best solution would be something like what Daniel
mentioned - to have multiple (maybe 2-4 but the number really depends on
your availability and scalability requirements) Kamailio instances at the
edge, each with a corresponding standby ready to take over that IP in a
failover scenario.
Combine that setup with rotating the A and SRV records in your DNS server
(most DNS servers support automatically rotating the records in a
response), and you should be able to support all kinds of clients.
Best,
Colin
On Thu, Jun 30, 2016 at 11:49 AM Daniel Tryba <d.tryba(a)pocos.nl> wrote:
On Thu, Jun 30, 2016 at 05:15:19PM +0200, Giacomo
Vacca wrote:
Remember though that the Load Balancer will be
your Single Point Of Failure. If the Load Balancer dies, for any reason,
the service is not available.
...
Depending on the capabilities of the clients you
may consider removing
the
Load Balancer from the equation and perform
DNS-based load balancing
across
your Proxy/Registrar/PSTN Gw instances. You'd
be removing a SPOF, use one
fewer machine, and simplify the architecture. This is not always possible
to achieve though, because it delegates load balancing and fail over to
the
clients.
Clients are to stupid to do this, you have to target the lowest common
denominator which only connect to a single ip. The loadbalancer is one
of the most simple possible config of kamailio possible (dispatcher and
path).
So if you worry (rightly so) about a single point of failure in the
loadbalancer setup, make that one redundant by using a failover
mechanisme (heartbeat/keepalive/whatever). And having multiple instances
of this setup to use DNS based loadbalancing or simple primary/secondary
endpoints for the clients to connect to make any kind of failover
mechanisme for any type of client possible. The resources needed for a
loadbalancer are the least of all machines needed.
_______________________________________________
SIP Express Router (SER) and Kamailio (OpenSER) - sr-users mailing list
sr-users(a)lists.sip-router.org
http://lists.sip-router.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sr-users
6:36 p.m.
On Thu, Jun 30, 2016 at 03:56:00PM +0000, Colin Morelli wrote:
However, I think the best solution would be something
like what Daniel
mentioned - to have multiple (maybe 2-4 but the number really depends on
your availability and scalability requirements) Kamailio instances at the
edge, each with a corresponding standby ready to take over that IP in a
failover scenario.
Added benifit is the ability to upgrade/update the standby machine and
simply failover to verify/test with a simple rollback mechanism.
Combine that setup with rotating the A and SRV records
in your DNS server
(most DNS servers support automatically rotating the records in a
response), and you should be able to support all kinds of clients.
Roundrobin DNS A, SRV and NAPTR for sip.example.com. With records for
sip0/sip1.example.com and as last the bare ip addresses. And you can
make any redundant setup that any client supports.
The trick (IMHO) is to use the Path modules in the loadbalancer/proxy and
registrar server. Add the Path headers (with received paramaters) on the
loadbalancer/proxy and make sure the registrar module uses these
headers. Use dispatcher with callid hasing to loadbalance to the
backends. For the same secret for authentication over de backends
(modparam("auth", "secret", "sharedsecret")).
2863
days inactive
2863
days old
8 comments
4 participants
participants (4)
-
Colin Morelli -
Daniel Tryba -
Daryn Johnson -
Giacomo Vacca