And what exactly is this note supposed to mean?

[image1.png]

Sent from my iPhone

On Feb 8, 2020, at 8:56 AM, Jeffrey McHugh 
<jmch...@fidelus.com<mailto:jmch...@fidelus.com>> wrote:

This has some failover info it:
https://www.cisco.com/c/en/us/td/docs/voice_ip_comm/expressway/config_guide/X12-5/exwy_b_mra-expressway-deployment-guide/exwy_b_mra-expressway-deployment-guide_chapter_01.html

I think it’s fairly new for expressway 12.5.x guides, I don’t remember seeing 
it in 8.11 guides


Jeffrey McHugh | Practice Manager, Collaboration Services

<Fidelus_3c42e82e-9666-4571-9a52-153c0a95720c.png><http://www.fidelus.com/>
Fidelus Technologies, LLC
Named Best UC Provider in the 
USA<http://www.fidelus.com/fidelus-technologies-named-best-unified-communications-provider-in-the-usa/>
240 West 35th Street, 6th Floor, New York, NY 10001
+1-212-616-7801 office | +1-212-616-7850 fax | 
www.fidelus.com<http://www.fidelus.com/>
<LinkedIn_bb1846fd-fe30-4493-adae-437fc220210d.png><http://www.linkedin.com/company/fidelus-technologies/products><Twitter_4a5902fd-a650-4f4b-924a-b72459df5b8e.png><http://www.twitter.com/FidelusUCC><Facebook_f02c6893-c48c-4d43-a030-92362ae2bdb3.png><http://www.facebook.com/FidelusUCC><YouTube_e6262ffc-4cc2-4a50-8967-15cb4475a956.png><http://www.youtube.com/FidelusTraining>

Disclaimer - This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and 
intended solely for the person(s) addressed to. If you are not the named 
addressee you should not disseminate, distribute, copy or alter this email. Any 
views or opinions presented in this email are solely those of the author and 
might not represent those of Fidelus Technologies, LLC. Warning: Although 
Fidelus Technologies, LLC has taken reasonable precautions to ensure no viruses 
are present in this email, the company cannot accept responsibility for any 
loss or damage arising from the use of this email or attachments.
From: cisco-voip 
<cisco-voip-boun...@puck.nether.net<mailto:cisco-voip-boun...@puck.nether.net>> 
On Behalf Of Jonathan Charles
Sent: Friday, February 7, 2020 11:22 PM
To: Ryan Huff <ryanh...@outlook.com<mailto:ryanh...@outlook.com>>
Cc: cisco-voip@puck.nether.net<mailto:cisco-voip@puck.nether.net>
Subject: [EXT] Re: [cisco-voip] Expressway Cluster failover for MRA...

So I changed the SRV records to be equal priority and weight... and everything 
works fine.

If I put a C & E pair at a site in maintenance mode, we do NOT see automatic 
reregistration of phone services to the other C/E pair at the other site.

If you log out and back in, it does automatically reregister.

If we put one of the 4 Expressways in maintenance mode, it fails over 
automatically.

How do we achieve automatic failover for MRA?


Jonathan


On Wed, Jan 29, 2020 at 3:17 PM Jonathan Charles 
<jonv...@gmail.com<mailto:jonv...@gmail.com>> wrote:
I mean an outbound flow... offnet Jabber calls PSTN... I need it to go to 
primary DC... the only way I can force that is by lowering priority of the 
collab-edge SRV record.

To force a failover, I put the primary in maintenance mode, then Jabber times 
out and dies... log out, log back in and it connects to the DR.

If I set the SRVs to the same priority, it seems to connect thru the DR site 
(out of spite).


Jonathan

On Wed, Jan 29, 2020 at 2:59 PM Ryan Huff 
<ryanh...@outlook.com<mailto:ryanh...@outlook.com>> wrote:
That seems correct. It seems like you’re speaking about an outbound flow and 
Lelio is speaking about an inbound flow.

The traversal client cluster (the CS) should know about all the peers in the 
traversal server cluster (the Es).
Sent from my iPhone


On Jan 29, 2020, at 15:21, Jonathan Charles 
<jonv...@gmail.com<mailto:jonv...@gmail.com>> wrote:

OK, maybe I am misunderstanding... I have th E's paired together as a cluster 
and the C's paired together as a cluster... I have the C's initiating a UCM 
traversal client to both E's... is this not correct?


Jonathan

On Tue, Jan 28, 2020 at 7:59 PM Lelio Fulgenzi 
<le...@uoguelph.ca<mailto:le...@uoguelph.ca>> wrote:
I could be wrong here, but from what was explained to me...

You may be able to control the initial connection from off-prem device to the E 
of your choosing, but you cannot control which C that E talks to. And 
vice-versa.

So, you could point people to Ea, but they could easily be sent to Cs. And that 
traffic back from Cs could easily be sent to Es.

I was told at one time, the only option would be to put hosts in maintenance 
mode or something like that. But it wasn’t advised.

I’d love to hear other suggestions.
-sent from mobile device-

Lelio Fulgenzi, B.A. | Senior Analyst
Computing and Communications Services | University of Guelph
Room 037 Animal Science & Nutrition Bldg | 50 Stone Rd E | Guelph, ON | N1G 2W1
519-824-4120 Ext. 56354<tel:519-824-4120;56354> | 
le...@uoguelph.ca<mailto:le...@uoguelph.ca>

www.uoguelph.ca/ccs<https://nam11.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.uoguelph.ca%2Fccs&data=02%7C01%7C%7C990b53ac7bf74dc9f6d908d7a4f8d85e%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C637159260995053342&sdata=N%2F%2FyzmALTugonxBWql9Ed1RU91GlfciMVacel%2FTm6nU%3D&reserved=0>
 | @UofGCCS on Instagram, Twitter and Facebook


On Jan 28, 2020, at 8:49 PM, Jonathan Charles 
<jonv...@gmail.com<mailto:jonv...@gmail.com>> wrote:
We have two pairs of Expressway clusters (C/E) at two different locations 
(primary and DR)...

The cluster is up, however, we want to make sure that we are in Active/Standby.

Currently, we have one of our SRV records for collab-edge set at 5 (the backup 
is at 10) with the same weight.

The clustering guide says we should set the priority and weight on both SRV 
records the same, which will cause half of the registrations to go to the DR 
site. It is far away and has less capability.

How do we:

1 - Make sure the primary site handles all MRA registrations and the DR site is 
only used when the primary is down.
2 = Make sure failover occurs automatically... currently Jabber users have to 
log out and back in to connect to the DR site.


Thanks!


Jonathan

_______________________________________________
cisco-voip mailing list
cisco-voip@puck.nether.net<mailto:cisco-voip@puck.nether.net>
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip<https://nam11.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fpuck.nether.net%2Fmailman%2Flistinfo%2Fcisco-voip&data=02%7C01%7C%7C990b53ac7bf74dc9f6d908d7a4f8d85e%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C637159260995053342&sdata=Uc0yDIk78tTL3s3jGUD8YOn1BTAz8BQfsQn1IcmFsoY%3D&reserved=0>
_______________________________________________
cisco-voip mailing list
cisco-voip@puck.nether.net<mailto:cisco-voip@puck.nether.net>
https://nam11.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fpuck.nether.net%2Fmailman%2Flistinfo%2Fcisco-voip&amp;data=02%7C01%7C%7C990b53ac7bf74dc9f6d908d7a4f8d85e%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C637159260995073329&amp;sdata=FiPM638B7JKc3x9OhTq2s9Tf1hqWUQ9chaJfw13bxkk%3D&amp;reserved=0
_______________________________________________
cisco-voip mailing list
cisco-voip@puck.nether.net<mailto:cisco-voip@puck.nether.net>
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip
_______________________________________________
cisco-voip mailing list
cisco-voip@puck.nether.net
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip

Reply via email to