Re: Using *RT for HA purposes was: [Asterisk-Users]Realtime MultipleAsterisk boxes, iaxusers
Hi, ALL: Can anyone tell me what *RT is ? What is its full name? I think the * is asterisk but what is RT ? 2006/2/2, Rusty Shackleford [EMAIL PROTECTED]: -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Alistair Cunningham Sent: Wednesday, January 04, 2006 4:25 AM To: Asterisk Users Mailing List - Non-Commercial Discussion Subject: Re: Using *RT for HA purposes was: [Asterisk-Users]Realtime MultipleAsterisk boxes, iaxusers load balacing isn't perfect, and it can give uneven loads at low capacity, but it gets better as load increases which is where it matters. What kind of loads are we talking about here, please? ___ --Bandwidth and Colocation provided by Easynews.com -- Asterisk-Users mailing list To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users -- Best Regards Charles ___ --Bandwidth and Colocation provided by Easynews.com -- Asterisk-Users mailing list To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
RE: Using *RT for HA purposes was: [Asterisk-Users]Realtime MultipleAsterisk boxes, iaxusers
-Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Alistair Cunningham Sent: Wednesday, January 04, 2006 4:25 AM To: Asterisk Users Mailing List - Non-Commercial Discussion Subject: Re: Using *RT for HA purposes was: [Asterisk-Users]Realtime MultipleAsterisk boxes, iaxusers load balacing isn't perfect, and it can give uneven loads at low capacity, but it gets better as load increases which is where it matters. What kind of loads are we talking about here, please? ___ --Bandwidth and Colocation provided by Easynews.com -- Asterisk-Users mailing list To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
Re: Using *RT for HA purposes was: [Asterisk-Users] Realtime MultipleAsterisk boxes, iaxusers
I did some research about Asterisk and High Availability and some sort of load balancing. The High Availability issue isnn't much of a problem. I did it with heartbeat en realtime. But the load balancing issue is realy a problem. You want a load balancer to make decisions based on call ID. The call ID is stored in the SIP header (layer 7) and for all I know there are only a few load balancers that can make decisions based on this layer and those load balancers are not SIP aware. So for now I don't think load balancing with *servers could be easily achieved.On 1/4/06, Kevin P. Fleming [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Asterisk wrote: In my case I would be using DNS round robin.So a UA would only be registering to one * server at a time.So wouldn't in fact be an active/passive?No. You have said that you want the _other_ servers to be aware of that phone's registration and be able to deliver calls to it directly. Thatwill not work.If you want the other servers to send calls to that phone through theserver it registered with, then yes, that can easily be done. ___--Bandwidth and Colocation provided by Easynews.com --Asterisk-Users mailing listTo UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users-- Tijmen van den BrinkWilhelminaweg 46 3441 XC WoerdenTel: 0642233831MSN: [EMAIL PROTECTED]Skype: [EMAIL PROTECTED] SIP:[EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ --Bandwidth and Colocation provided by Easynews.com -- Asterisk-Users mailing list To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
Re: Using *RT for HA purposes was: [Asterisk-Users] Realtime MultipleAsterisk boxes, iaxusers
Tijmen, We use SER for this to load balance across multiple Asterisks. We then use a custom program to monitor the health of the Asterisks and update SER's configuration should one go down. 2 SERs share a single IP address for users to contact using heartbeat. It works well, and we have several customers with it in production. The load balacing isn't perfect, and it can give uneven loads at low capacity, but it gets better as load increases which is where it matters. Alistair Cunningham, Integrics Ltd, +44 (0)7870 699 479 http://integrics.com/ tijmen van den brink wrote: I did some research about Asterisk and High Availability and some sort of load balancing. The High Availability issue isnn't much of a problem. I did it with heartbeat en realtime. But the load balancing issue is realy a problem. You want a load balancer to make decisions based on call ID. The call ID is stored in the SIP header (layer 7) and for all I know there are only a few load balancers that can make decisions based on this layer and those load balancers are not SIP aware. So for now I don't think load balancing with *servers could be easily achieved. On 1/4/06, *Kevin P. Fleming* [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Asterisk wrote: In my case I would be using DNS round robin. So a UA would only be registering to one * server at a time. So wouldn't in fact be an active/passive? No. You have said that you want the _other_ servers to be aware of that phone's registration and be able to deliver calls to it directly. That will not work. If you want the other servers to send calls to that phone through the server it registered with, then yes, that can easily be done. ___ --Bandwidth and Colocation provided by Easynews.com http://Easynews.com -- Asterisk-Users mailing list To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users -- Tijmen van den Brink Wilhelminaweg 46 3441 XC Woerden Tel: 0642233831 MSN: [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Skype: [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] SIP:[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:SIP:[EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ --Bandwidth and Colocation provided by Easynews.com -- Asterisk-Users mailing list To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users ___ --Bandwidth and Colocation provided by Easynews.com -- Asterisk-Users mailing list To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
Re: Using *RT for HA purposes was: [Asterisk-Users] Realtime MultipleAsterisk boxes, iaxusers
On 04/01/06, Alistair Cunningham [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Tijmen, We use SER for this to load balance across multiple Asterisks. We then use a custom program to monitor the health of the Asterisks and update SER's configuration should one go down. 2 SERs share a single IP address for users to contact using heartbeat. I was thinking along the same lines, but for a dynamic setup it should be possible to have SER/OpenSER load balance REGISTER requests according to some strategy/metrics, and then forward INVITEs and other call-related traffic to the 'right' back-end server. Probably lots of reasons why this is too complicated, though Peter -- Peter Bowyer Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Tel: +44 1296 768003 VoIP: sip:[EMAIL PROTECTED] VoIP: [EMAIL PROTECTED] FWD: **275*5048707000 VoipTalk: **473*5048707000 ___ --Bandwidth and Colocation provided by Easynews.com -- Asterisk-Users mailing list To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
Re: Using *RT for HA purposes was: [Asterisk-Users] Realtime MultipleAsterisk boxes, iaxusers
Peter Bowyer wrote: I was thinking along the same lines, but for a dynamic setup it should be possible to have SER/OpenSER load balance REGISTER requests according to some strategy/metrics, and then forward INVITEs and other call-related traffic to the 'right' back-end server. Probably lots of reasons why this is too complicated, though One being that it must be the device that NAT phones register with that delivers calls to them. Otherwise, the NAT device sees a packet coming from an unknown IP address and drops it (for common types of NAT such as restricted cone). Since SER needs to deliver calls, it really needs to be SER that accepts REGISTERs and holds the registration information. The Asterisks then send calls from phones to the SER heartbeat address for delivery. This is what we do in our ITSP in a box product. It gives us full redundancy and failover with the registration capacity of SER and the features of Asterisk. For very large systems, it's possible to have SER redirect (with load balancing) REGISTERs to a set of SERs so that NAT devices know about the machines their phones are registered on, but this takes great care to get right in all cases. Alistair Cunningham, Integrics Ltd, +44 (0)7870 699 479 http://integrics.com/ ___ --Bandwidth and Colocation provided by Easynews.com -- Asterisk-Users mailing list To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
Re: Using *RT for HA purposes was: [Asterisk-Users] Realtime MultipleAsterisk boxes, iaxusers
On 04/01/06, Alistair Cunningham [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Peter Bowyer wrote: I was thinking along the same lines, but for a dynamic setup it should be possible to have SER/OpenSER load balance REGISTER requests according to some strategy/metrics, and then forward INVITEs and other call-related traffic to the 'right' back-end server. Probably lots of reasons why this is too complicated, though One being that it must be the device that NAT phones register with that delivers calls to them. Otherwise, the NAT device sees a packet coming from an unknown IP address and drops it (for common types of NAT such as restricted cone). Yes, that's the sort of reason I was thinking of :-) I guess you could NAT the whole cluster behind a single IP with some fancy firewall/router rules Since SER needs to deliver calls, it really needs to be SER that accepts REGISTERs and holds the registration information. The Asterisks then send calls from phones to the SER heartbeat address for delivery. And if a lot of the calls are SIP-SIP, I guess - why bother Asterisk with them at all... This is what we do in our ITSP in a box product. It gives us full redundancy and failover with the registration capacity of SER and the features of Asterisk. Sounds good. For very large systems, it's possible to have SER redirect (with load balancing) REGISTERs to a set of SERs so that NAT devices know about the machines their phones are registered on, but this takes great care to get right in all cases. Yeah - I knew this was harder than it looked :-) Peter -- Peter Bowyer Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Tel: +44 1296 768003 VoIP: sip:[EMAIL PROTECTED] VoIP: [EMAIL PROTECTED] FWD: **275*5048707000 VoipTalk: **473*5048707000 ___ --Bandwidth and Colocation provided by Easynews.com -- Asterisk-Users mailing list To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
Re: Using *RT for HA purposes was: [Asterisk-Users] Realtime MultipleAsterisk boxes, iaxusers
On Wed, Jan 04, 2006 at 02:46:36PM +, Alistair Cunningham wrote: Peter Bowyer wrote: I was thinking along the same lines, but for a dynamic setup it should be possible to have SER/OpenSER load balance REGISTER requests according to some strategy/metrics, and then forward INVITEs and other call-related traffic to the 'right' back-end server. Probably lots of reasons why this is too complicated, though One being that it must be the device that NAT phones register with that delivers calls to them. Otherwise, the NAT device sees a packet coming from an unknown IP address and drops it (for common types of NAT such as restricted cone). Since SER needs to deliver calls, it really needs to be SER that accepts REGISTERs and holds the registration information. The Asterisks then send calls from phones to the SER heartbeat address for delivery. This is what we do in our ITSP in a box product. It gives us full redundancy and failover with the registration capacity of SER and the features of Asterisk. Could you perhaps be as kind as to give us a few example configurations and some more detailed documentation on how you've done this. I'm very interested in building something similar, right now I'm running one Asterisk but with estimated growth I'll need two and using a SER in front to load balance would be a really nice solution. Kristian. ___ --Bandwidth and Colocation provided by Easynews.com -- Asterisk-Users mailing list To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
RE: Using *RT for HA purposes was: [Asterisk-Users] Realtime MultipleAsterisk boxes, iaxusers
If the two servers service distinctly separate groups of endpoints, they can share the same table since they won't care about the other server's entries. If the two servers service the same endpoints but in an active/passive arrangement, that would also work. In my case I would be using DNS round robin. So a UA would only be registering to one * server at a time. So wouldn't in fact be an active/passive? If not could I call the Asterisk Manager Interface from my java fastAGI to grab the sip channel status on each server? I have not use the Manager interface before so I don't know how fast it is, but does this sound like it would work? To answer a previous poster. My issue for me is high availability and scalability. Thanks Doug -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Kevin P. Fleming Sent: Tuesday, January 03, 2006 2:13 PM To: Asterisk Users Mailing List - Non-Commercial Discussion Subject: Re: Using *RT for HA purposes was: [Asterisk-Users] Realtime MultipleAsterisk boxes, iaxusers Mike Fedyk wrote: With the current *RT release? Yes. The crux of the issue that you can't have two servers responsible for updating the same records in the table, and that you can't have two servers both expected to react to changes in those records on an instantaneous basis (which is why you can't share the table across two active servers and expect both of them to be aware of where the peers are). ___ --Bandwidth and Colocation provided by Easynews.com -- Asterisk-Users mailing list To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users ___ --Bandwidth and Colocation provided by Easynews.com -- Asterisk-Users mailing list To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
Re: Using *RT for HA purposes was: [Asterisk-Users] Realtime MultipleAsterisk boxes, iaxusers
Asterisk wrote: In my case I would be using DNS round robin. So a UA would only be registering to one * server at a time. So wouldn't in fact be an active/passive? No. You have said that you want the _other_ servers to be aware of that phone's registration and be able to deliver calls to it directly. That will not work. If you want the other servers to send calls to that phone through the server it registered with, then yes, that can easily be done. ___ --Bandwidth and Colocation provided by Easynews.com -- Asterisk-Users mailing list To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
