[Serusers] dns failover
samuel
samu60 at gmail.com
Wed May 16 17:56:35 CEST 2007
I'm sorry but I don't know enough about the internals . Maybe Andrei (DNS)
and Dragos (openIMS) can help with it.
Probably the most important lines of the log are:
[00m 1(17870) [01;30mdns_hash_find(scscf.open-ims.test(19), 1), h=915
[00m 1(17870) [01;30mdns_a_resovle(scscf.open-ims.test, 0) returning 0
[00m 1(17870)
[01;30mdns_srv_resolve_ip("_sip._udp.scscf.open-ims.test", 0, 0),
ret=0, ip=127.0.0.1
[00m 1(17870) [01;30mdns_sip_resolve(scscf.open-ims.test, 0, 0), srv0, ret=0
It looks like there's only one returning record...while in the DNS there are
two.
Try to post last message to openims and serdev lists and maybe developers
can help with it...
Just for trying, can you add a second fake SRV entry differing not only in
the port but also in the hostname?
Luck,
Samuel.
2007/5/16, Mário Ferreira <mariojvp at gmail.com>:
>
> Hi,
>
> I tried with SER version ser 2.1.0-dev1, with dns cache and failover
> compile options, and with use_dns_cache and
> use_dns_failover turned on in the config files ( of P and I-CSCF, the
> previous hop of S-CSCF) , but it doesn't work.
> I attached the log corresponding to the REGISTER reception by I-CSCF and
> delivery to S-CSCF.
> I have two S-CSCFs and when i kill one, the message never goes to the
> other S-CSCF.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Mário Ferreira
>
> On 5/14/07, Mário Ferreira <mariojvp at gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > Hi,
> >
> > The SER version was updated, but only in the trunk of openimscore, and i
> > had a working copy of a branch (with the old SER version) .
> > Now, i have checked out the trunk and i will test it soon.
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Mário Ferreira
> >
> > On 5/14/07, samuel < samu60 at gmail.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > It looks like SER is compiled with all compilation flags for DNS
> > > failover... are these features set in the config file?
> > > I guess you're using openIMS SER branch, isn't it? I don't know if it
> > > has been sync with latest SER 2.0 and I can not assure whether ser
> > > 0.10.99-dev53-tm_fixes has SRV failover support (which I think it does
> > > althought with maybe some bugs).
> > >
> > > From the dig output I guess you're trying to load balance between the
> > > two servers responding for scscf.open-ims.test, isn't it?
> > > Can you please attach the log file section where SER is trying to send
> > > to this destination?
> > >
> > > Thanks,
> > > Samuel
> > >
> > > 2007/5/14, Mário Ferreira < mariojvp at gmail.com>:
> > > >
> > > > Hi,
> > > >
> > > > # ser -V
> > > > version: ser 0.10.99-dev53-tm_fixes (i386/linux)
> > > > flags: STATS: Off, USE_IPV6, USE_TCP, DISABLE_NAGLE, USE_MCAST,
> > > > DNS_IP_HACK, SHM_MEM, SHM_MMAP, PKG_MALLOC, DBG_QM_MALLOC,
> > > > FAST_LOCK-ADAPTIVE_WAIT, USE_DNS_CACHE, USE_DNS_FAILOVER, USE_DST_BLACKLIST
> > > > ADAPTIVE_WAIT_LOOPS=1024, MAX_RECV_BUFFER_SIZE 262144, MAX_LISTEN
> > > > 16, MAX_URI_SIZE 1024, BUF_SIZE 65535
> > > > poll method support: poll, epoll_lt, epoll_et, sigio_rt, select.
> > > > @(#) $Id: main.c 136 2007-02-13 17:58:42Z vingarzan $
> > > > main.c compiled on 22:49:24 Mar 26 2007 with gcc 3.4.6
> > > >
> > > > # dig NAPTR open-ims.test
> > > >
> > > > ; <<>> DiG 9.2.4 <<>> NAPTR open-ims.test
> > > > ;; global options: printcmd
> > > > ;; Got answer:
> > > > ;; ->>HEADER<<- opcode: QUERY, status: NOERROR, id: 56440
> > > > ;; flags: qr aa rd ra; QUERY: 1, ANSWER: 2, AUTHORITY: 1,
> > > > ADDITIONAL: 3
> > > >
> > > > ;; QUESTION SECTION:
> > > > ;open-ims.test. IN NAPTR
> > > >
> > > > ;; ANSWER SECTION:
> > > > open-ims.test. 86400 IN NAPTR 10 50 "s" "SIP+D2U"
> > > > "" _sip._udp.open- ims.test.
> > > > open-ims.test. 86400 IN NAPTR 20 50 "s" "SIP+D2T"
> > > > "" _sip._tcp.open-ims.test.
> > > >
> > > > ;; AUTHORITY SECTION:
> > > > open-ims.test. 86400 IN NS
> > > > 127.0.0.1.open-ims.test .
> > > >
> > > > ;; ADDITIONAL SECTION:
> > > > icscf.open-ims.test. 86400 IN A 127.0.0.1
> > > > _sip._udp.open-ims.test . 86400 IN SRV 0 0 5060
> > > > icscf.open-ims.test.
> > > > _sip._tcp.open- ims.test. 86400 IN SRV 0 0 5060
> > > > icscf.open-ims.test.
> > > >
> > > > ;; Query time: 0 msec
> > > > ;; SERVER: 127.0.0.1#53(127.0.0.1 )
> > > > ;; WHEN: Mon May 14 18:24:18 2007
> > > > ;; MSG SIZE rcvd: 259
> > > >
> > > > # dig _sip._udp.scscf.open-ims.test. srv
> > > >
> > > > ; <<>> DiG 9.2.4 <<>> _sip._udp.scscf.open-ims.test. srv
> > > > ;; global options: printcmd
> > > > ;; Got answer:
> > > > ;; ->>HEADER<<- opcode: QUERY, status: NOERROR, id: 21445
> > > > ;; flags: qr aa rd ra; QUERY: 1, ANSWER: 2, AUTHORITY: 1,
> > > > ADDITIONAL: 1
> > > >
> > > > ;; QUESTION SECTION:
> > > > ;_sip._udp.scscf.open-ims.test. IN SRV
> > > >
> > > > ;; ANSWER SECTION:
> > > > _sip._udp.scscf.open-ims.test. 86400 IN SRV 0 1 6060
> > > > scscf.open-ims.test.
> > > > _sip._udp.scscf.open-ims.test. 86400 IN SRV 0 1 6061
> > > > scscf.open-ims.test.
> > > >
> > > > ;; AUTHORITY SECTION:
> > > > open-ims.test. 86400 IN NS
> > > > 127.0.0.1.open-ims.test.
> > > >
> > > > ;; ADDITIONAL SECTION:
> > > > scscf.open-ims.test. 86400 IN A 127.0.0.1
> > > >
> > > > ;; Query time: 0 msec
> > > > ;; SERVER: 127.0.0.1#53( 127.0.0.1)
> > > > ;; WHEN: Mon May 14 18:26:33 2007
> > > > ;; MSG SIZE rcvd: 165
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > regards,
> > > >
> > > > Mário Ferreira
> > > >
> > > > On 5/13/07, samuel <samu60 at gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > I have tried DNS failover and can assert is working like charm for
> > > > > SER version 2.0 and further.
> > > > > Which SER version are you using?
> > > > >
> > > > > can you check wheter you have compiled SER with DNS failover?
> > > > > which is the ouput of
> > > > > #ser -V
> > > > > what is the ouput of
> > > > > #dig NAPTR yourdomain.name.com
> > > > > (replace yourdomain.name.com for the appropriate valie)
> > > > >
> > > > > regards,
> > > > > sam.
> > > > >
> > > > > 2007/5/10, Mário Ferreira <mariojvp at gmail.com >:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Hi,
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I am interested in using SER DNS failover, but I am getting some
> > > > > > problems.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > A failure can be a 503 error response, ICMP errors or a timeout
> > > > > > due to a not received response.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Does anyone know if SER is able to detect these failures and
> > > > > > then select an alternative destination for the message?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > If the ICMP errors can't be detected, can this be solved with
> > > > > > timers?
> > > > > > I turned on use_dns_cache and use_dns_failover, but when the
> > > > > > message fails to be delivered to the first destination,
> > > > > > SER never tries the second destination, which was configured
> > > > > > with DNS SRV.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > regards,
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Mário Ferreira
> > > > > >
> > > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > > Serusers mailing list
> > > > > > Serusers at lists.iptel.org
> > > > > > http://lists.iptel.org/mailman/listinfo/serusers
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.sip-router.org/pipermail/sr-users/attachments/20070516/eb3ee70e/attachment.htm>
More information about the sr-users
mailing list