[Serusers] R: R: Loadbalancing for interco

[Stefano Capitanio]

It is the simplest ser.cfg you can imagine:

	Route {
		forward(z.z.z.z,5060);
	}


The message enter in SER (y.y.y.y) as:

	U x.x.x.x:5060 -> y.y.y.y:5060
	REGISTER sip:213.203.128.126 SIP/2.0.
	Via: SIP/2.0/UDP 	x.x.x.x:5060;rport;branch=z9hG4bKFCDF5014775145F7BBFB33B621BC8BC0.
	From: openser <sip:123456102 at y.y.y.y>;tag=1540538748.
	To: openser <sip:123456102 at y.y.y.y>.
	Contact: "openser" <sip:123456102 at x.x.x.x:5060>.
	Call-ID: 23FDB6F533AC4BCF840FD35F34B385FD at y.y.y.y.
	CSeq: 60558 REGISTER.
	Expires: 120.
	Max-Forwards: 70.
	User-Agent: X-Lite release 1103m.
	Content-Length: 0.

And goes out as:

	U y.y.y.y:5060 -> z.z.z.z:5060
	REGISTER sip:y.y.y.y SIP/2.0.
	Via: SIP/2.0/UDP y.y.y.y:5060;branch=0.
	Via: SIP/2.0/UDP 	195.110.129.41:5060;rport=5060;branch=z9hG4bKFCDF5014775145F7BBFB33B621BC8BC0.
	From: openser <sip:123456102 at y.y.y.y>;tag=1540538748.
	To: openser <sip:123456102 at y.y.y.y>.
	Contact: "openser" <sip:123456102 at y.y.y.y:5060>.
	Call-ID: 23FDB6F533AC4BCF840FD35F34B385FD at y.y.y.y.
	CSeq: 60558 REGISTER.
	Expires: 120.
	Max-Forwards: 70.
	User-Agent: X-Lite release 1103m.
	Content-Length: 0.



> -----Messaggio originale-----
> Da: Jiri Kuthan [mailto:jiri at iptel.org]
> Inviato: lunedì 12 novembre 2007 17.41
> A: Stefano Capitanio; serusers at lists.iptel.org
> Oggetto: Re: [Serusers] R: Loadbalancing for interco
> 
> I haven't seen your config file, but normally it does not change Contacts.
> It changes contacts if it is configured to deal with NATs.
> 
> -jiri
> 
> At 17:20 12/11/2007, Stefano Capitanio wrote:
> >Ok, thanks for your answer, I understand your position.
> >
> >Anyway I cannot understand why SER modify the Contact header without any
> instruction about that in the config file...is there any reason concerning
> RFC compliance?
> >
> >Best regards,
> >Stefano
> >
> >> -----Messaggio originale-----
> >> Da: Jiri Kuthan [mailto:jiri at iptel.org]
> >> Inviato: lunedì 12 novembre 2007 17.09
> >> A: Stefano Capitanio; serusers at lists.iptel.org
> >> Oggetto: Re: [Serusers] Loadbalancing for interco
> >>
> >> Well, load-balancing is not easy. To deal with issues like you are
> >> describing,
> >> your best choice is a load-balancer which is capable of working in
> >> transparent
> >> mode. We have such in our intelligence, some work, some less so, let me
> >> know
> >> if you need some intelligence on this.
> >>
> >> -jiri
> >>
> >> At 12:23 12/11/2007, Stefano Capitanio wrote:
> >> >Content-class: urn:content-classes:message
> >> >Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
> >> >        boundary="----_=_NextPart_001_01C8251E.664EA61A"
> >> >
> >> >Hi,
> >> >
> >> >we are trying to do the same with our servers but we have some problem
> >> with registrations:
> >> >it seem that when the REGISTER message pass through SER, the host-part
> of
> >> Contact field is modified with the local address of SER.
> >> >Is it a misconfiguration problem?
> >> >Do you have experience in balancing also the registrations?
> >> >
> >> >Thanks,
> >> >Stefano
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >On Thu, 2007-09-13 at 11:02 +0200, inge wrote:
> >> >
> >> >> Hi all,
> >> >
> >> >>
> >> >
> >> >> Is there a way to have something like a loadbalancing on SER for
> >> >
> >> >> outgoing calls ?
> >> >
> >> >>
> >> >
> >> >> I want to distribute the calls between two gateways. Ideally, with a
> >> >
> >> >> coefficient (ie. 60% for the first and 40% for the second).
> >> >
> >> >>
> >> >
> >> >> Thanks for your support.
> >> >
> >> >>
> >> >
> >> >> Adrien .L
> >> >_______________________________________________
> >> >Serusers mailing list
> >> >Serusers at lists.iptel.org
> >> >http://lists.iptel.org/mailman/listinfo/serusers
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> --
> >> Jiri Kuthan            http://iptel.org/~jiri/
> >_______________________________________________
> >Serusers mailing list
> >Serusers at lists.iptel.org
> >http://lists.iptel.org/mailman/listinfo/serusers
> 
> 
> 
> --
> Jiri Kuthan            http://iptel.org/~jiri/