Hi,
Let's say there are two SER servers A and B, a UAC and a UAS. If a request from UAC to UAS is routed via A and right after that A fails and B takes over, which impacts does it have if 1xx/200 replies from UAS to UAC are routed via B?
The replies could theoretically be routed correctly because the next hop is available in the Via header. But since there is no transaction stored in SER for this, does this work? And what about accounting? What other functionality would be affected?
Andy
On 30-08-2005 11:01, Andreas Granig wrote:
Hi,
Let's say there are two SER servers A and B, a UAC and a UAS. If a request from UAC to UAS is routed via A and right after that A fails and B takes over, which impacts does it have if 1xx/200 replies from UAS to UAC are routed via B?
The replies could theoretically be routed correctly because the next hop is available in the Via header. But since there is no transaction stored in SER for this, does this work? And what about accounting? What other functionality would be affected?
In this case SER will try to lookup the transaction in memory and it will fail, so it will forward the reply statelessly, using the IP address from Via). That means things like accounting, NAT traversal, failure_route, AVPs and others that require the transaction state will not work properly.
Jan.
-
Andreas Granig -
Jan Janak