[Kamailio-Users] How to calculate hash_index on DB carrierroute

[Uriel Rozenbaum]

Hi Henning,

I'm using something like you described. I'll rely on the probabilities to
make the trick and that's all.

Thanks for the quick reply!
Uriel

On Tue, Apr 14, 2009 at 8:11 AM, Henning Westerholt <
henning.westerholt at 1und1.de> wrote:

> On Monday 13 April 2009, Uriel Rozenbaum wrote:
> > I'm configuring some balance and failure routes with CarrierRoute module.
> >
> > I have the following topology:
> >
> >                                     -----------> Carrier1
> >                --------> GW1
> >                                     -----------> Carrier2
> > Kamailio
> >                                     -----------> Carrier1
> >                --------> GW2
> >                                     -----------> Carrier2
> >
> > The idea will be to select a carrier using carrierroute going out through
> > GW1. If GW1 fails (timeout) i want the call to go to the same carrier
> > through the other GW.
>
> Hi Uriel,
>
> > I assume the hash value calculated on cr_route will
> > be the same for the failure route, but I need to verify the fields used
> on
> > the DB to calculate a hash_index and the way that they are calculated so
> I
> > can assure the previous behavior.
>
> The hash index is only configurable in the config file mode. This is for
> example usable if you use it in front of a registrar cluster that access a
> partioned database. I.e. the user location information for user that hash
> to
> index 1 is stored in DB A, hash index 2 is stored in DB B and so on.. Then
> you can ensure that all users that hash to 1 goes to the appropriate
> registrar server.
>
> But for your use case you probably don't need to configure this. If you
> want
> to configure a failover logic like this then you only need to setup the
> routing rules appropriate. Example for carrierroute:
>
> - carrier1, prop 50%, domain0 -> GW1 (Carrier 1)
> - carrier1, prop 50%, domain0 -> GW2 (Carrier 1)
> - carrier2, prop 50%, domain0 -> GW1 (Carrier 2)
> - carrier2, prop 50%, domain0 -> GW2 (Carrier 2)
>
> - carrier1, prop 100%, domain1 -> GW2 (Carrier 1)
> - carrier2, prop 100%, domain1 -> GW2 (Carrier 2)
> - carrier1, prop 100%, domain2 -> GW1 (Carrier 1)
> - carrier2, prop 100%, domain2 -> GW1 (Carrier 2)
>
> carrier_failure_route:
>
> - reply match 408, hostname GW1, carrier1 -> next_domain 1
> - reply match 408, hostname GW1, carrier2 -> next_domain 1
> - reply match 408, hostname GW2, carrier1 -> next_domain 2
> - reply match 408, hostname GW2, carrier2 -> next_domain 2
>
> Hope that helps.. If you don't like to specify the failover logic manually
> like this, you could use the dispatcher module instead, which supports
> detection of dead GWs and provides methods of trying the "next" GW in
> failure
> route.
>
> Cheers,
>
> Henning
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.sip-router.org/pipermail/sr-users/attachments/20090414/6d13e9fc/attachment.htm>