[Users] SER as loadbalancer and NAT

Andreas Granig andreas.granig at inode.info
Thu Jan 12 18:27:08 CET 2006


Andreas Granig wrote:
> But I see this approach isn't RFC compliant, so maybe it's better to 
> forget this hack and go for a clean Path-Header solution...

Just an idea regarding load balancing and NAT using the Path header:

When having a scenario like this:

[uac] -> [nat] -> [sip loadbalancer] -> [sip proxy]

Then I could construct a Path header like the following at the load 
balancer for REGISTERs:

Path: <sip:<own-address;lr>, <sip:<received-address>;lr>;nat=yes

Which is saved at the sip proxy when acting as registrar and will be 
converted into a Route header for subsequent requests towards the uac.

This would allow loose-routing on the load balancer to traverse the 
client's nat: In addition to removing the first uri (the own) from the 
Route header, loose_route() would check for the "nat=yes" flag in the 
next uri and would remove that uri from the Route header too after 
setting it as dst-uri.

Would this make sense, or are there more-elegant/simpler/better ways for 
achieving such a loadbalancing scenario (keeping in mind that there 
might be more than one load balancer and that it has to work with NAT)?

Andy




More information about the Users mailing list