[Serusers] replication and rtpproxy

Darren Nay dnay at ionosphere.net
Thu Feb 26 19:03:20 CET 2004

Check out this method.

It's designed for HTTP requests, but I don't see any reason that it couldn't
be used for SER as well.

Darren Nay

-----Original Message-----
From: Klaus Darilion [mailto:klaus.mailinglists at pernau.at] 
Sent: Thursday, February 26, 2004 12:55 PM
To: Andres
Cc: Nils Ohlmeier; serusers at lists.iptel.org
Subject: Re: [Serusers] replication and rtpproxy

But this will work only if the client uses your DNS servers, because the 
DNS entries are cached by the other nameservers - or do you have a very 
short TTL configured?

I think also softclients will have problems as Windows XP by default 
caches the DNS lookups.


Andres wrote:
> Hi Klaus,
> We use DNS updates.  We have special scripts based on sipsak (Thanks
> that check all SIP servers every minute.  If something is wrong, then we
> update our DNS dynamically to point to another SIP Server.  If the UAs are
> unable to register then they redo their DNS query and find the new IP.
> Works quite well in combination with replication since the backup server
> the exact duplicate location table.
> Regards,
> Andres
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: "Klaus Darilion" <klaus.mailinglists at pernau.at>
> To: "Nils Ohlmeier" <nils at iptel.org>
> Cc: <serusers at lists.iptel.org>
> Sent: Thursday, February 26, 2004 9:59 AM
> Subject: Re: [Serusers] replication and rtpproxy
>>Nils Ohlmeier wrote:
>>>On Thursday 26 February 2004 03:28, Arnd Vehling wrote:
>>>>Next question :) Is there any way that a failover server pickups the
>>>>neccessary port bindings for portaones rtpproxy or do will all
>>>>"rtpproxied" sessions fail when a failover server will take over
>>>>a primary server?
>>>As currently the rtp-proxy has to run on the same host as SER it does
> not make
>>>much sence IMHO to think about taking over rtp-proxy sessions. Then you
> would
>>>need some kind of rtp-proxy session replication, which should be easy
> when
>>>the nathelper module and the rtp proxy ever uses IP protocol for
>>>communication. But all this will only work if the backup server takes
> over
>>>the IP of the failed server, and you are not using SRV backup servers
> for
>>>example (except that a SRV backup can obviously also can takeover the
> IP).
>>Is it yet possible to build redundancy on top of SRV? I tested some
>>clients (Xlite, Budgetone-100, Windows Messenger 4.7) wether they use
>>SRV records to locate the proxy and Messenger is the only one who uses it.
>>So, if I use these clients, is there any other failover solution than IP
>>Serusers mailing list
>>serusers at lists.iptel.org

Serusers mailing list
serusers at lists.iptel.org

More information about the sr-users mailing list