[SR-Users] Kamailio in VMware with Fault Tolerance on

[Patrick Wakano]

Thanks for your input Sergio!
Our current active-standby uses keepalived to manage the shared IP between
the servers. It works fine. Now we are trying a new architecture as a step
towards a public cloud deployment.


On Tue, 3 Nov 2020, 21:45 Sergio Charrua, <sergio.charrua at voip.pt> wrote:

> Patrick,
>
> I would rely on Corosync and Pacemaker for failover, using a shared IP
> address between (active + passive) servers. Once the active goes down,
> Pacemaker switches the shared IP to the passive server that will then
> become the active server.
>
> Hope this helps,
>
> *Sérgio Charrua*
>
> *www.voip.pt <http://www.voip.pt/>*
>
> Tel.: +351  <callto:+351+91+104+12+66>21 130 71 77
>
> Email : *sergio.charrua at voip.pt <sergio.charrua at voip.pt>*
>
> This message and any files or documents attached are strictly confidential
> or otherwise legally protected.
>
> It is intended only for the individual or entity named. If you are not the
> named addressee or have received this email in error, please inform the
> sender immediately, delete it from your system and do not copy or disclose
> it or its contents or use it for any purpose. Please also note that
> transmission cannot be guaranteed to be secure or error-free.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On Tue, Nov 3, 2020 at 9:55 AM Daniel-Constantin Mierla <miconda at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Hello,
>>
>> is the active-active architecture still relying on a single shared ip
>> that is migrated between the systems, or do you use two shared ips and each
>> system is associated with one in normal operational mode? Or is anycast?
>>
>> Cheers,
>> Daniel
>> On 03.11.20 03:38, Patrick Wakano wrote:
>>
>> Thanks for the info Daniel! Much appreciated!
>> Our previous architecture was active-standby with VIP and keepalived,
>> however we are moving towards an active-active approach.
>> Cheers,
>> Patrick Wakano
>>
>> On Tue, 3 Nov 2020 at 04:40, Daniel-Constantin Mierla <miconda at gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Hello,
>>>
>>> I try to stay away from infrastructure, so I do not know the exact
>>> technical details and whether it uses Fault Tolerance, but I have customers
>>> using VMware, some with rather busy sip servers (50000+ active users) and
>>> all runs smooth there. But in this specific case, there is no DMQ, data is
>>> shared via database (MySQL), the secondary system being in standby ready to
>>> take over the IP of the primary server.
>>>
>>> Cheers,
>>> Daniel
>>> On 02.11.20 07:31, Patrick Wakano wrote:
>>>
>>> Hello list,
>>> Hope you are all good!
>>>
>>> Recently, the issue https://github.com/kamailio/kamailio/issues/2535
>>> has been investigated and the utilization of the feature vsphere Fault
>>> Tolerance is linked as a source of network latency and probably CPU
>>> allocation latency. This increases the chances of the mentioned issue to
>>> happen.
>>> So I would just like to ask if anyone out there is using Kamilio in a
>>> VMware environment with Fault Tolerance on? How is the experience?
>>>
>>> Kind regards,
>>> Patrick Wakano
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Kamailio (SER) - Users Mailing Listsr-users at lists.kamailio.orghttps://lists.kamailio.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sr-users
>>>
>>> --
>>> Daniel-Constantin Mierla -- www.asipto.comwww.twitter.com/miconda -- www.linkedin.com/in/miconda
>>> Funding: https://www.paypal.me/dcmierla
>>>
>>> --
>> Daniel-Constantin Mierla -- www.asipto.comwww.twitter.com/miconda -- www.linkedin.com/in/miconda
>> Funding: https://www.paypal.me/dcmierla
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Kamailio (SER) - Users Mailing List
>> sr-users at lists.kamailio.org
>> https://lists.kamailio.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sr-users
>>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.kamailio.org/pipermail/sr-users/attachments/20201103/dd5292ad/attachment.htm>