[Serusers] use of SRV records for failover

[Iqbal]

lvs can't, there are other kludge solutions like dispatcher, dns-srv 
etc, but not perfect solution, has been discussed alot of times on list

Iqbal

Marcello Lupo wrote:

> Hi,
> i was searching a way to do the same thing but using the Linux virtual 
> server i didn't found a way to let the virtual server to continue to 
> send to the same SER all the UDP packet related to a specific call. It 
> should have a module to check the CallID header and mantain a table on 
> which SER is managing it for all packet (INVITE,TRYING,RINGING,OK,BYE 
> and so on).
> The other solution may be to use TCP SIP but i don't like it and not 
> so much clients have support for it.
> Let me know if you found a good way to do it.
> Bye
> Marcello
>
> ----- Original Message ----- From: "sip" <sip at arcdiv.com>
> To: "Markus Storm" <markus.storm at telefonica.de>; <serusers at lists.iptel.org>
> Cc: <serusers-bounces at lists.iptel.org>
> Sent: Tuesday, September 27, 2005 12:34 PM
> Subject: Re: [Serusers] use of SRV records for failover
>
>
>> Markus,
>>
>> I'm not sure I fully understand.  Are you trying to essentially load
>> balance by using SRV records in DNS?
>>
>> Those two aren't really the same thing. You'd need some sort of gateway
>> software/hardware that keeps track of current state of the sub server
>> processes in order to determine at any given point which is up and which
>> is down... PLUS it sounds like you want to make it so that each is
>> assigned a weight.
>>
>> SER doesn't really have the ability to do that on its own. You could
>> probably MAKE it do that with some very creative scripting and/or
>> database queries... but it wouldn't be pretty.
>>
>> It would be easier to use an actual load balancer/load balancing
>> software to accept initial connections and forward those accordingly.
>>
>> For instance, if you want SER1 to forward calls to EITHER SER2 or SER3,
>> then you would have SER1 point to a load-balanced virtual server. Some
>> other software would handle the load balancing and SER would be unaware
>> that it wasn't pointing to a normal server. This could be done pretty
>> easily using linux virtual server or some such and it wouldn't require
>> any special setup in SER.
>>
>> N.
>>
>> On Tue, 27 Sep 2005 10:31:43 +0200, Markus Storm wrote
>>
>>> Dear all,
>>>
>>> we would like to do loadbalancing and failover with SRV in our multi-
>>> SER setup.
>>>
>>> I.e. ser-1 gets a call and can forward the call to either ser-2 or
>>> ser-3. There's a DNS SRV record that points to both, ser-2 and ser-3
>>> (same weight, same priority). On ser-1, I use the SRV name to
>>> forward calls to.
>>>
>>> Now I'd like ser-1 to distribute calls according to weight and
>>> priority, i.e. 50% to ser-2 and 50% to ser-3. But it doesn't, it
>>> keeps sending to ser-2 (the first entry in the SRV record's list).
>>>
>>> Also, if say ser-2 goes down, I'd like ser-1 to notice that and only
>>> ever try to send subsequent requests to ser-2 until <something>
>>> happens (e.g. until the SRV record TTL expires).
>>>
>>> I found a one-year old message in the archives stating that neither
>>> of this is possible
>>> (unless I use a DNS A record that points to multiple IP addresses,
>>> but that's not what I want).
>>>
>>> Is it meanwhile possible with the current SER software ?
>>>
>>> thanks
>>> Markus
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> 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
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Serusers mailing list
> serusers at lists.iptel.org
> http://lists.iptel.org/mailman/listinfo/serusers
>
> .
>