[Kamailio-Users] Carrierroute issue
Omar
omar at 321communications.com
Tue Feb 9 23:00:59 CET 2010
Hello
I did the same Changes long time ago, but i have the same issue even
when always goes more to one IP, and we really know when will go to
the Next IP also is there a way if the endpoint is down will the calls
go to the next IP automatically?
i have the same table scenario with .5 and .5 in the prob, and hits
one IP more than the other.
__________________________
O
On Jul 30, 2009, at 4:27 PM, michel freiha wrote:
> Dear Uriel,
>
> I found it...The problem was in the makefile of carrierroute
> module...I did Chged the following:
>
>
> DEFS+=$(CONFUSEDEFS)
> LIBS=$(CONFUSELIBS)
>
> TO:
>
> DEFS+=-I$(LOCALBASE)/include
> LIBS=-L$(LOCALBASE)/lib -lconfuse
>
> It seems that carrierroute needs that in order to be compiled on
> Solaris
>
> Thanks a lot for the help
>
> Regards
>
>
> On Thu, Jul 30, 2009 at 10:32 PM, michel freiha <michofr at gmail.com>
> wrote:
> Dear Uriel,
>
> It worked fine as you mentionned below and Y.Y.Y.Y is used when I
> changed the domain to 1 on X.X.X.X
>
> Regards
>
>
> On Thu, Jul 30, 2009 at 9:16 PM, Uriel Rozenbaum <uriel.rozenbaum at gmail.com
> > wrote:
> It's really weird. Try changing the domain on the X.X.X.X host to 1,
> so you only have Y.Y.Y.Y host available as first option.
>
>
> On Thu, Jul 30, 2009 at 3:07 PM, michel freiha <michofr at gmail.com>
> wrote:
> Dear Sir,
>
> I did 2 calls from the same endpoint to the same number and get 2
> different IDs but still forwarding the calls to X.X.X.X as follow:
>
> Call1:
>
> call-id for this call 56549e09d94c1430Jul 30 17:00:32 [10607]
> DBG:carrierroute:get_route_tree_by_id: searching in carrier default,
> id 5
> Jul 30 17:00:32 [10607] DBG:carrierroute:get_route_tree_by_id: tree
> default, domain 0 : 0
> Jul 30 17:00:32 [10607] DBG:carrierroute:rewrite_on_rule: searching
> for matching routing rulesJul 30 17:00:32 [10607]
> DBG:core:hash_func: hash: 1307293616 % -2147483648 = 1307293616
> Jul 30 17:00:32 [10607] INFO:carrierroute:cr_do_route: uri
> 009613089187 was rewritten to sip:001232333333 at X.X.X.X
>
> Call2:
> call-id for this call 063197524438d55dJul 30 17:02:18 [10605]
> DBG:carrierroute:get_route_tree_by_id: searching in carrier default,
> id 5
> Jul 30 17:02:18 [10605] DBG:carrierroute:get_route_tree_by_id: tree
> default, domain 0 : 0
> Jul 30 17:02:18 [10605] DBG:carrierroute:rewrite_on_rule: searching
> for matching routing rulesJul 30 17:02:18 [10605]
> DBG:core:hash_func: hash: 931879127 % -2147483648 = 931879127
> Jul 30 17:02:18 [10605] INFO:carrierroute:cr_do_route: uri
> 009613089187 was rewritten to sip:001232333333 at X.X.X.X
>
> Any suggestions?
>
> Regards
>
>
>
>
>
> On Thu, Jul 30, 2009 at 5:17 PM, Uriel Rozenbaum <uriel.rozenbaum at gmail.com
> > wrote:
> The random value is based on the Call-ID, use debug=4 and add an
> XLOG as follows before every call to cr_route:
>
> xlog("L_ERR", "call-id for this call $ci");
>
> Check the call-id is different every time and the CRC32 algorithm to
> calculate the hash values gives a different answer.
>
>
> On Thu, Jul 30, 2009 at 9:49 AM, michel freiha <michofr at gmail.com>
> wrote:
> When restarting kamailio I found out that it reads both routes
>
> Jul 30 11:46:40 [9165] INFO:carrierroute:rule_fixup_recursor:
> hashless rule with host Y.Y.Y.Y hash hash_index 1
> Jul 30 11:46:40 [9165] INFO:carrierroute:rule_fixup_recursor:
> hashless rule with host X.X.X.X hash hash_index 2
>
> I jjst do not know why it's not reading the prob
>
>
>
> On Thu, Jul 30, 2009 at 3:39 PM, michel freiha <michofr at gmail.com>
> wrote:
> Dear Sir,
>
> Please find below carrierroute table...
> +----+---------+--------+-------------+-------+------+------+-------
> +--------------+----------------+----------------+-------------+
> | id | carrier | domain | scan_prefix | flags | mask | prob | strip
> | rewrite_host | rewrite_prefix | rewrite_suffix | description |
> +----+---------+--------+-------------+-------+------+------+-------
> +--------------+----------------+----------------+-------------+
> | 1 | 5 | 0 | 00 | 0 | 0 | 0.1 | 0
> | X.X.X.X | | | NULL |
> | 2 | 5 | 0 | 00 | 0 | 0 | 0.9 | 0
> | Y.Y.Y.Y | | | NULL |
> +----+---------+--------+-------------+-------+------+------+-------
> +--------------+----------------+----------------+-------------+
>
>
> on kamailio.conf:
>
> if(!cr_route("default", "0", "$rU", "$rU", "call_id")){
>
> sl_send_reply("403", "Not allowed");
> } else {
> # In cas of failure, re-route the request
> t_on_failure("1");
> # Relay the request to the gateway
> t_relay();
> }
>
>
> When trying to call 00123456666 the call is forwarded all the time
> to X.X.X.X IP and never to Y.Y.Y.Y IP...why this happening? It's
> like Kamailio is not reading prob field
>
> Regards
>
>
>
>
>
> On Thu, Jul 30, 2009 at 3:13 PM, Uriel Rozenbaum <uriel.rozenbaum at gmail.com
> > wrote:
> I'm really not sure how it works when you use a 0 prob.
>
> Try something like 50/50 and check if the requests go to both servers.
>
> Also, some extract from /var/log/messages will help.
>
>
> On Thu, Jul 30, 2009 at 4:38 AM, michel freiha <michofr at gmail.com>
> wrote:
> Dear Sir,
>
> My tables are defined as below:
>
> carrierroute table:
>
> id carrier domain scan_prefix flags mask
> prob strip rewrite_host
> 19 5 1 00 0
> 0 0 0 IP_address1
> 19 5 1 00 0
> 0 1 0 IP_Address1
>
> route_tree table:
>
> id carrier
> 5 default
>
> In kamalio.cfg:
>
> if(!cr_route("default", "1", "$rU", "$rU", "call_id")){
>
>
> The issue is that kamailio is forwarding all calls to IP_Address1
> and never to IP_Address2 even if prob is 1 for IP_Address2 and 0 for
> IP_Address1
>
>
> Any help please?
>
>
>
> On Wed, Jul 29, 2009 at 6:45 PM, Uriel Rozenbaum <uriel.rozenbaum at gmail.com
> > wrote:
> Michel,
>
> The prob field is to set the proportion of a certain entry to be
> taken when you are load balancing between carriers.
>
> To perform an overflow operation you have to use the domain field.
>
> Check the samples on the module documentation; it's preety clear
> there; if you have further questions just post them here.
>
> Rgds,
> Uriel
>
> On Wed, Jul 29, 2009 at 10:39 AM, michel freiha <michofr at gmail.com>
> wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> I'm using carrierroute module and ie seems that it's not working
> well...Suppose I have 2 entries in carrierroute table...Entry 1 with
> scan prefix 00 and prob 0 and a second entry with scan prefix 00 and
> prob=1...As soon as i make a call, this call will be forwarded to
> the entry with prob 0 because i guess it appears before the one with
> prob 1 in the table...
>
> When starting Kamailio I got the below:
>
> Jul 29 12:30:11 [23143] INFO:carrierroute:add_route: adding prefix
> 1, prob -14931260.000000
> Jul 29 12:30:11 [23143] INFO:carrierroute:get_route_tree: domain 0
> not found, add it
> Jul 29 12:30:11 [23143] INFO:carrierroute:add_route_tree: tree
> default has 1 trees
> Jul 29 12:30:11 [23143] DBG:carrierroute:add_route_tree: tree 0Jul
> 29 12:30:11 [23143] INFO:carrierroute:get_route_tree: created route
> tree: 0, with id 0
> Jul 29 12:30:11 [23143] INFO:carrierroute:add_route: found route,
> now adding
> Jul 29 12:30:11 [23143] INFO:carrierroute:add_route_rule: no backed
> up rules
> Jul 29 12:30:11 [23143] INFO:carrierroute:add_route: adding prefix ,
> prob -14931260.000000
> Jul 29 12:30:11 [23143] INFO:carrierroute:get_route_tree: found
> domain 0
> Jul 29 12:30:11 [23143] INFO:carrierroute:add_route: found route,
> now adding
> Jul 29 12:30:11 [23143] INFO:carrierroute:add_route_rule: no backed
> up rules
> Jul 29 12:30:11 [23143] INFO:carrierroute:add_route: adding prefix
> 011, prob -14931260.000000
> Jul 29 12:30:11 [23143] INFO:carrierroute:get_route_tree: found
> domain 0
> Jul 29 12:30:11 [23143] INFO:carrierroute:add_route: found route,
> now adding
> Jul 29 12:30:11 [23143] INFO:carrierroute:add_route_rule: no backed
> up rules
> Jul 29 12:30:11 [23143] INFO:carrierroute:add_route: adding prefix
> 00, prob -14931260.000000
> Jul 29 12:30:11 [23143] INFO:carrierroute:get_route_tree: found
> domain 0
> Jul 29 12:30:11 [23143] INFO:carrierroute:add_route: found route,
> now adding
> Jul 29 12:30:11 [23143] INFO:carrierroute:add_route_rule: no backed
> up rules
> Jul 29 12:30:11 [23143] INFO:carrierroute:add_route: adding prefix
> 111, prob -14931260.000000
> Jul 29 12:30:11 [23143] INFO:carrierroute:get_route_tree: found
> domain 0
> Jul 29 12:30:11 [23143] INFO:carrierroute:add_route: found route,
> now adding
> Jul 29 12:30:11 [23143] INFO:carrierroute:add_route_rule: no backed
> up rules
> Jul 29 12:30:11 [23143] INFO:carrierroute:add_route: adding prefix
> 00, prob -14931260.000000
> Jul 29 12:30:11 [23143] INFO:carrierroute:get_route_tree: found
> domain 0
> Jul 29 12:30:11 [23143] INFO:carrierroute:add_route: found route,
> now adding
> Jul 29 12:30:11 [23143] INFO:carrierroute:add_route_rule: no backed
> up rules
> Jul 29 12:30:11 [23143] INFO:carrierroute:add_route: adding prefix ,
> prob -14931260.000000
> Jul 29 12:30:11 [23143] INFO:carrierroute:get_route_tree: found
> domain 0
> Jul 29 12:30:11 [23143] INFO:carrierroute:add_route: found route,
> now adding
> Jul 29 12:30:11 [23143] INFO:carrierroute:add_route_rule: no backed
> up rules
> Jul 29 12:30:11 [23143] INFO:carrierroute:add_route: adding prefix
> 011, prob -14931260.000000
> Jul 29 12:30:11 [23143] INFO:carrierroute:get_route_tree: found
> domain 0
> Jul 29 12:30:11 [23143] INFO:carrierroute:add_route: found route,
> now adding
> Jul 29 12:30:11 [23143] INFO:carrierroute:add_route_rule: no backed
> up rules
> Jul 29 12:30:11 [23143] INFO:carrierroute:add_route: adding prefix
> 011, prob -14931260.000000
> Jul 29 12:30:11 [23143] INFO:carrierroute:get_route_tree: found
> domain 0
> Jul 29 12:30:11 [23143] INFO:carrierroute:add_route: found route,
> now adding
> Jul 29 12:30:11 [23143] INFO:carrierroute:add_route_rule: no backed
> up rules
> Jul 29 12:30:11 [23143] INFO:carrierroute:add_route: adding prefix ,
> prob -14931260.000000
> Jul 29 12:30:11 [23143] INFO:carrierroute:get_route_tree: found
> domain 0
> Jul 29 12:30:11 [23143] INFO:carrierroute:add_route: found route,
> now adding
> Jul 29 12:30:11 [23143] INFO:carrierroute:add_route_rule: no backed
> up rules
>
> It seems that kamailio is not reading probability entry in carrier
> route table
>
> Please find below carrierroute table structure:
>
> CREATE TABLE IF NOT EXISTS `carrierroute` (
> `id` int(10) unsigned NOT NULL auto_increment,
> `carrier` int(10) unsigned NOT NULL default '0',
> `domain` varchar(64) NOT NULL default '',
> `scan_prefix` varchar(64) NOT NULL default '',
> `flags` int(11) unsigned NOT NULL default '0',
> `mask` int(11) unsigned NOT NULL default '0',
> `prob` float NOT NULL default '0',
> `strip` int(11) unsigned NOT NULL default '0',
> `rewrite_host` varchar(128) NOT NULL default '',
> `rewrite_prefix` varchar(64) NOT NULL default '',
> `rewrite_suffix` varchar(64) NOT NULL default '',
> `description` varchar(255) default NULL,
> PRIMARY KEY (`id`)
> ) ENGINE=MyISAM DEFAULT CHARSET=latin1 AUTO_INCREMENT=23 ;
>
>
> Can someone help me to find this issue?
>
> Regards
>
> _______________________________________________
> Kamailio (OpenSER) - Users mailing list
> Users at lists.kamailio.org
> http://lists.kamailio.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users
> http://lists.openser-project.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Kamailio (OpenSER) - Users mailing list
> Users at lists.kamailio.org
> http://lists.kamailio.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users
> http://lists.openser-project.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.sip-router.org/pipermail/sr-users/attachments/20100209/dcaa0ad0/attachment.htm>
More information about the sr-users
mailing list