[SR-Users] Redundancy between 2 Kamailio servers

[Danny Dias]

Thanks Alex...

2011/1/27 Alex Hermann <alex at speakup.nl>

> On Thursday 27 January 2011, Klaus Darilion wrote:
> > Am 27.01.2011 11:21, schrieb Danny Dias:
> > > I've read some difficulty in the synchronisation of registrations
> because
> > > Kamailio works best when it stores registrations in memory and
> > > registrations are constantly changing - they expire and are renewed, as
> > > well as new ones joining and old ones leaving. To make the failover
> > > solution function seamlessly, it is necessary to synchronise the
> > > in-memory registrations between the primary and the backup server .
> This
> > > can be done by forking a copy of the registration request to the backup
> > > server, but there are some practical problems in doing this, has anyone
> > > do something with this?
>
> What problems are you referring to? I use this for some years now without
> any
> problems.
>
>
>
I checked for some problems here:

http://www.smartvox.co.uk/astfaq_ha_failover_ideas.htm



> > Yes - the problem with SIP based replication is that both proxies must
> > be running. This is a problem as Kamailio binds to the virtual IP at
> > start up - thus adding the virtual IP address to the backup server does
> > not make Backup-Kamailio listening to the new IP address - you would
> > have to restart the backup Kamailio.
>
> Just bind kamailio to the HA IP on both servers and do REGISTER replication
> between the two (on SIP level). Then if the IP migrates to the other
> server,
> it will take over the rgistrar function with no loss of records. No restart
> needed.
>

Do you mean that both Kamailio-1 and Kamailio-2 will be as primary server?
and the clients will register in the 2 machines? and also they will bind to
the ip of the HA? sorry my friend but i do not understand very well, i'm
quite new with redundant systems, could you please explain a little?


>
>
> > I think most people either have a database (which is highly-available by
> > itself) which is used by both proxies, or every proxy has a local
> > database and the synchronization is on DB level (e.g. master-slave
> > replication, btw: does somebody know if usrloc DB queries are suitable
> > for master-master replication?)
>
> Last time i tried, they are not, at least not in writeback mode. One proxy
> is
> expiring records from the DB which the other proxy is trying to update.
> Maybe
> DB-only mode will work, but that has some practical (performcance)
> problems.
> --
> Greetings,
>
> Alex Hermann
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> SIP Express Router (SER) and Kamailio (OpenSER) - sr-users mailing list
> sr-users at lists.sip-router.org
> http://lists.sip-router.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sr-users
>



-- 
Ing. Danny Dias
www.DannTEL.net
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.sip-router.org/pipermail/sr-users/attachments/20110127/69d0b43d/attachment.htm>