[Serusers] More on load balancing: LVS + SRVs, SER + Asterisk

[Iqbal]

so just to get a summary out of this, is there a way to do load 
balancing, and f so is this without LVS and dispatcher, I havent tried 
either, just figured I'd wait until the dust had settled.

iqbal

Greger V. Teigre wrote:

> LVS can do UDP load distribution based on UA's IP address. i think 
> that is what Pietro suggests.  Then the receiving SER must know where 
> the call should go.  Such a solution will anyway be reliant on a 
> single server, as Juha pointed out.
> g-)
>
> Iqbal wrote:
>
>> would lvs do this, I mean doesnt it have a problem with udp/SIP
>> judging by the threads u mentioned and those on lvs list.
>>
>>
>>
>> Iqbal
>>
>> On 5/12/2005, "Juha Heinanen" <jh at tutpro.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Pietro Ravasio writes:
>>>
>>>> When UA_A calls UA_B, its INVITE will reach the same SER it has
>>>> previously registered to (SER_1, thanks to LVS persistence), SER_1
>>>> will then look for UA_B and will notice that it is registered as
>>>> UA_B at ser2.domain.com, DNS will be queried and SER_2 will be
>>>> contacted in order to handle INVITE and send it to UA_B through
>>>> already opened UDP channel (resolving NAT).
>>>
>>>
>>> what happens if ser_1 or ser_2 is down when this call takes place?
>>>
>>>> Have you got any suggestion/comment?
>>>
>>>
>>> i don't at all like an idea of mixing a third component (asterisk) to
>>> this.  the whole thing should be doable with sers and load balancers
>>> alone.
>>>
>>> -- juha
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Serusers mailing list
>>> serusers at lists.iptel.org
>>> http://lists.iptel.org/mailman/listinfo/serusers
>>>
>>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Serusers mailing list
>> serusers at lists.iptel.org
>> http://lists.iptel.org/mailman/listinfo/serusers 
>
>
>
> .
>