[Serusers] "Best practice" document, was Warning: sl_send_reply: I won't send a reply for ACK!!

Iqbal Gandham iqbal at gigo.co.uk
Mon Feb 21 14:51:05 CET 2005


The fifo part is where i was coming unstuck also, however someone 
mentioned something about fifo_relay which might help, since I need to 
put it on my web cluser as opposed to on SER box. I agree it is good as 
a base especially if you dont have the time to write your own.

In regards to the billing, this would be fine for postpaid, since we can 
get the mins, and then just do the maths for various destinations etc 
using a rate table, however for postpaid wont you have to disconnect the 
call somewhere, if so how do you (if you do) send the BYE message to the 
gateway once the timer has run out

Iqbal


Java Rockx wrote:
> We do billing from the SER acc module by recording INVITE and BYE
> messages. We do not worry about accounting at the PSTN gateway. Fraud
> detection and billing must be handled outside of the scope of the SIP
> proxy if scaleablity is important.
> 
> The reason I say this is that the RTP streams have the most impact on
> systems and we do not believe that a VoIP platform can afford to route
> all RTP traffic for the sake of accounting at the PSTN gateway.
> 
> On the serweb note, we concluded that serweb is nothing more than a
> "good" reference at best. Our decision to scrap serweb in favor of a
> 100% homegrown interface was based on the fact that serweb is nowhere
> near optimized for large installations. The way it hits the database
> repetitively for the same data is crazy. And that smarty stuff is too
> expensive, IMHO.
> 
> Our homegrown PHP system fully supports multiple domains, as does our
> SIP proxy, and we don't have nearly the amount of code to maintain. We
> have all the functionality of serweb, except for the Instant Messaging
> because we don't use the Jabber module in ser.
> 
> Another major problem with serweb, and perhaps this is the most
> important, is that serweb uses the FIFO in ser, which forces serweb to
> live on the same box as the sip proxy. This is very very very bad. Our
> web application has zero ties to the sip proxy, and we fully support
> Click2Dial, voicemail, etc, etc, and we fully scale just like any good
> Apache installation.
> 
> Just my US$0.02 worth.
> 
> Regards,
> Paul
> 
> 
> On Mon, 21 Feb 2005 13:22:38 +0000, Iqbal Gandham <iqbal at gigo.co.uk> wrote:
> 
>>I would disagree with serweb, I think its very googd, especially the
>>newer version which implements domain based system, hence if you are
>>supporting several virtual sip providers it provides a good base
>>platform on which to add things/features.
>>
>>You mentioned that you only use the mediaproxy when one or both are
>>behind NAT, if this is the case (and a good one :-)), then how do you
>>handel the billing or is that done at the gateway i.e cisco , since if
>>the media stream is not passing through, then its a bit hard to control
>>the call...which is why I originally went with asterisk, and passed the
>>calls through there, but am now moving more towards your suggestion of
>>using asterisk just for the conf calling/voicemail type of things.
>>Although its did have a nice rate engine built in :-)
>>
>>Iqbal
>>
>>Java Rockx wrote:
>>
>>>Dial plans must be covered. This is a basic requirement for nearly all
>>>SER implementations.
>>>
>>>Regards,
>>>Paul
>>>
>>>
>>>On Mon, 21 Feb 2005 09:44:43 -0000, Chris <ser at cannes.f9.co.uk> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>Do you propose different dial plans
>>>>e.g. EU vs US vs ... ?
>>>>
>>>>-----Original Message-----
>>>>From: serusers-bounces at iptel.org [mailto:serusers-bounces at lists.iptel.org] On
>>>>Behalf Of Java Rockx
>>>>Sent: 21 February 2005 01:05
>>>>To: Simon Miles
>>>>Cc: serusers at lists.iptel.org
>>>>Subject: Re: [Serusers] "Best practice" document,was Warning: sl_send_reply:
>>>>I won't send a reply for ACK!!
>>>>
>>>>Guys,
>>>>
>>>>If I might suggest emailing a ser.cfg to everyone privately so make
>>>>sure it is rock solid before sharing with the serusers list.
>>>>
>>>>The reason is that others my immediately use the ser.cfg verbatim and
>>>>when blast us with questions. So by having a known "good" ser.cfg on
>>>>the mailing list we could mitigate other users questions for problems
>>>>that would have otherwise been fixed.
>>>>
>>>>Also, we should come to an agreement of what the overall system should
>>>>do - you know, a kind of reference for others to build upon.
>>>>
>>>>My setup uses SER v0.9 and Asterisk-1.0.2. The Asterisk server is used
>>>>__ONLY__ for voicemail because - well lets face it, Asterisk sucks as
>>>>a SIP router because it just isn't designed to be one.
>>>>
>>>>So all users are managed by SER and Asterisk only comes into play for
>>>>voicemail and for playing recordings such as "the party you are
>>>>calling has blocked your call" when a call block is enabled.
>>>>
>>>>We should leave redundancy out of the picture for now because fault
>>>>tolerant SER is still something many users don't use and it's
>>>>something that is still maturing in SER. Besides, my opinion on this
>>>>matter is that a "ser clustering" should be a product of the Linux HA
>>>>technologies (expect for registration functionality).
>>>>
>>>>The ser.cfg we present should also show how to use MySQL for
>>>>accounting, usrloc, etc.
>>>>
>>>>serweb should be avoided altogether because this is nothing more than
>>>>a reference implementation that I believe not a primetime offering,
>>>>again, just my humble opinion.
>>>>
>>>>Failover PSTN gateways must be covered as well as NAT traversal. The
>>>>NAT traversal I use is mediaproxy because it seems to just work
>>>>better, especially in distributed deployments.
>>>>
>>>>On this NAT note, my ser.cfg only proxies RTP streams when one or more
>>>>SIP clients is behind a NAT firewall. The exception to this is when a
>>>>SIP client needs to hit the Asterisk server. The reason for this is
>>>>that the Asterisk server is physically a differenet machine that does
>>>>not have direct access to the internet. Instead I use the SER server
>>>>with two (2) ethernet interfaces, whereby eth0 is the public interface
>>>>and eth1 is a 10.0.0.0 private network and I use a crossover cable to
>>>>the Asterisk server, which has only one private 10.0.0.0 interface.
>>>>
>>>>Since almost all serusers seem to be interested in voicemail I'd
>>>>suggest detail instructions on the Asterisk integration. I use the
>>>>ast_data patch, which is kindly provided by bwsys because this makes
>>>>managing Asterisk mailboxes a function of the MySQL database. And the
>>>>only other real hard part to Asterisk integration is the Message
>>>>Waiting Indicator, which I have modifed the app_voicemail.c file in
>>>>Asterisk to handing SUBSCRIBE messages a bit differently and I use
>>>>sipsak to send NOTIFY messages back to SER, which then proxies the
>>>>NOTIFY message to registered SIP clients to turn their MWI on or off.
>>>>
>>>>Call features should also be covered in the ser.cfg. Things like call
>>>>blocking, speed dialing, click2dial, etc. Things like 3-way calling,
>>>>call waiting, etc should not be covered because they are functions
>>>>usually implemented as IAD features.
>>>>
>>>>So basically this is a whole sip proxy, except for the redundancy part.
>>>>
>>>>Our company has a full tcp/ip networking patch that we plan to release
>>>>to the ser project. This tcp/ip patch gives us full FIFO functionality
>>>>as a TCP socket, and this is something we hope would be commited to
>>>>CVS and maintained in the core. As far as we can tell the networking
>>>>patch is stable, but we need to prove this further.
>>>>
>>>>So in closing, if anyone things we're better off coming up with a
>>>>ser.cfg in private, then let me know. If everyone things that the
>>>>serusers list is the place to do this then lets start for the benefit
>>>>of everyone!
>>>>
>>>>Regards,
>>>>Paul Hazlett
>>>>Celebration, FL USA
>>>>
>>>>--
>>>>No virus found in this outgoing message.
>>>>Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
>>>>Version: 7.0.300 / Virus Database: 266.1.0 - Release Date: 18/02/2005
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>_______________________________________________
>>>Serusers mailing list
>>>serusers at lists.iptel.org
>>>http://lists.iptel.org/mailman/listinfo/serusers
>>>
>>>.
>>>
>>
> 
> .
> 




More information about the sr-users mailing list