[OpenSIPS-Users] CRL using OpenSIPS 1.11
Hi all, I'm using OpenSIPS 1.11 with the tlsops TLS module. I'd like to know how does $tls_peer_revoked work. http://www.opensips.org/html/docs/modules/1.11.x/tlsops.html#id293582 How should I feed a CRL list so that $tls_peer_revoked answers if they're revoked or not? I'd like to use OCSP or if not possible yet, CRL files. I've seen there is a commit for the proto_tls module for OpenSIPS 2 https://github.com/OpenSIPS/opensips/commit/5503634c4e796410464484e5e9fb210e906a204d But I'd like to know how OpenSIPS 1.11 handles this. Best regards, Iker. ___ Users mailing list Users@lists.opensips.org http://lists.opensips.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users
Re: [OpenSIPS-Users] .Net Integartion To OpenSips
My terminology was not good, what I meant was is there any way that I can call the 'opensisctl add' command line function to create a user account remotely on the SIPS server, such as from a .Net application. I need to interface into OpenSIPS to create the user accounts. If the OpenSIPS Control Panel has this functionality I would be interested in knowing how it does it. Thanks ___ Users mailing list Users@lists.opensips.org http://lists.opensips.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users
[OpenSIPS-Users] Adding user accounts without using opensipsctl command line or OpenSIPS Control Panel
Is there any way to add user accounts into OpenSIPS without using the opensipsctl command line (opensipsctl add userName password) or the OpenSIPS Control Panel ? I was hoping there might be an interface using XML-RPC so I could call such functionality from a process that is remote to the server that OpenSIPS is running on. Many thanks in advance for any assistance. ___ Users mailing list Users@lists.opensips.org http://lists.opensips.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users
Re: [OpenSIPS-Users] Adding user accounts without using opensipsctl command line or OpenSIPS Control Panel
You can directly enter users in the db if using db mode. On Mar 7, 2016 12:41 PM, "Adrian Newell" wrote: > Is there any way to add user accounts into OpenSIPS without using the > opensipsctl command line (opensipsctl add *userName* *password)* or the > OpenSIPS Control Panel ? > > > > I was hoping there might be an interface using XML-RPC so I could call > such functionality from a process that is remote to the server that > OpenSIPS is running on. > > > > Many thanks in advance for any assistance. > > ___ > Users mailing list > Users@lists.opensips.org > http://lists.opensips.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users > > ___ Users mailing list Users@lists.opensips.org http://lists.opensips.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users
Re: [OpenSIPS-Users] Adding user accounts without using opensipsctl command line or OpenSIPS Control Panel
You can add them directly in the db. To my knowledge there are no other methods available. BR, 2016-03-03 10:15 GMT+01:00 Adrian Newell : > Is there any way to add user accounts into OpenSIPS without using the > opensipsctl command line (opensipsctl add *userName* *password)* or the > OpenSIPS Control Panel ? > > > > I was hoping there might be an interface using XML-RPC so I could call > such functionality from a process that is remote to the server that > OpenSIPS is running on. > > > > Many thanks in advance for any assistance. > > ___ > Users mailing list > Users@lists.opensips.org > http://lists.opensips.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users > > ___ Users mailing list Users@lists.opensips.org http://lists.opensips.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users
Re: [OpenSIPS-Users] dispatcher with t_relay performance
We have 200,000 CPS and more in future. Just worried about t_relay() and its
performance. Any idea?
--
Sent from my iPhone
> On Mar 6, 2016, at 2:44 PM, SamyGo wrote:
>
> I'd ask you to read difference between Load_balancer and Dispatcher module.
> Dispatcher module is not an accurate measure but it is the only option when
> it comes to load balancing REGISTER requests.
>
> Dispatcher is hence very light weight as compared to Load Balancer. For a 200
> CPS calls Load Balancer or Dispatcehr won't be putting any bigger impact
> relative to the business logic itself. For example doing alot of DB queries,
> engaging various other modules etc these things really define how light or
> heavy your system is going to be.
>
> Regards,
> Sammy
>
>
>> On Sun, Mar 6, 2016 at 10:36 AM, Satish Patel wrote:
>> Any thought on it???
>>
>> On Fri, Mar 4, 2016 at 1:30 PM, Satish Patel wrote:
>> > We have dispatcher and we are using very simple code block like following
>> >
>> > if (method=="REGISTER" || method=="INVITE" ) {
>> > ds_select_dst("1", "2");
>> > t_relay();
>> >}
>> >
>> > Does t_relay will keep all transaction in memory? and what will be the
>> > performance issue? we have ~200k cps calls.. what will be the impact?
>>
>> ___
>> Users mailing list
>> Users@lists.opensips.org
>> http://lists.opensips.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users
>
> ___
> Users mailing list
> Users@lists.opensips.org
> http://lists.opensips.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users
___
Users mailing list
Users@lists.opensips.org
http://lists.opensips.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users
Re: [OpenSIPS-Users] .Net Integartion To OpenSips
I mean, opensipsctl add just inserts to a database, so you could avoid using the opensipsctl command line client all together and just insert directly to the database. On 03/01/2016 09:10 AM, Adrian Newell wrote: My terminology was not good, what I meant was is there any way that I can call the ‘opensisctl add’ command line function to create a user account remotely on the SIPS server, such as from a .Net application. I need to interface into OpenSIPS to create the user accounts. If the OpenSIPS Control Panel has this functionality I would be interested in knowing how it does it. Thanks ___ Users mailing list Users@lists.opensips.org http://lists.opensips.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users ___ Users mailing list Users@lists.opensips.org http://lists.opensips.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users
Re: [OpenSIPS-Users] E_DLG_STATE_CHANGED in event route
Hello,
Make sure you also do the following:
- loadmodule "event_route.so", in order to have the events raised to the
route (I agree, user experience can be improved here, as this could be
automatically done, or made to throw a startup error)
- fetch your params before printing them, with "fetch_event_params".
More info in the event interface tutorial [1]
[1]: http://www.opensips.org/Documentation/Tutorials-EventInterface
Liviu Chircu
OpenSIPS Developer
http://www.opensips-solutions.com
On 06.03.2016 19:28, Admin wrote:
Hi all,
I want to track dialog state change using event_route but i am not
getting anything in the log file. The way i understand it is when the
dialog state changes, the event E_DLG_STATE_CHANGED is triggered, and
putting that in the event_route block, i should see it but it's not
showing in the log file.
What am i missing? Thank you.
event_route[E_DLG_STATE_CHANGED] {
xlog("Dialog state changed\n");
}
I am running opensips 2.1.2 on debian 8 64bit.
=
loadmodule "dialog.so"
modparam("dialog", "dlg_match_mode", 1)
modparam("dialog", "default_timeout", 14400) # 4 hours timeout
modparam("dialog", "db_mode", 1)
modparam("dialog", "db_update_period", 60)
modparam("dialog", "db_url",
"mysql://opensips:opensipsrw@localhost/opensips") # CUSTOMIZE ME
# create dialog with timeout
if ( !create_dialog("B") ) {
send_reply("500","Internal Server Error");
exit;
}
___
Users mailing list
Users@lists.opensips.org
http://lists.opensips.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users
___
Users mailing list
Users@lists.opensips.org
http://lists.opensips.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users
Re: [OpenSIPS-Users] Automatic support for UDP->TCP when MTU size reached?
Hi Gavin, No, there is no automated way of accomplishing that with OpenSIPS so far. You may, however, use the "$ml" (message length) pseudo-var [1] and create such logic in your config script. [1]: http://www.opensips.org/Documentation/Script-CoreVar-2-2#toc52 Liviu Chircu OpenSIPS Developer http://www.opensips-solutions.com On 29.02.2016 21:34, Gavin Murphy wrote: Hi all, I did a search on this and the most recent discussion I saw was from 2010, so I figured I would pose the question again: is there a way to have OpenSIPS automatically adjust the transport from UDP to TCP when the request size is within 200 bytes of the MTU size, as per section 18.1.1 of RFC 3261? I understand that NAPTR could be used to select the most desirable transport based on the destination, but what about based on message size? If it isn't supported automatically, is there a way to determine the message size just ahead of it being relayed so as to perhaps be able to alter the transport? Thanks, Gavin ___ Users mailing list Users@lists.opensips.org http://lists.opensips.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users ___ Users mailing list Users@lists.opensips.org http://lists.opensips.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users
Re: [OpenSIPS-Users] Changing transport protocol to SCTP
Hi Daniel, The + ";transport=sctp" protocol switching trick works on my 2.1.2 testbed just as before. Make sure you remove any OBP-altering logic, (e.g. ds_select_dst()) before doing the t_relay(). If the issue persists, you should open a GitHub ticket and we'll take a closer look. Liviu Chircu OpenSIPS Developer http://www.opensips-solutions.com On 29.02.2016 23:37, Moreira Yokoyama, Daniel wrote: Hi. In a given scenario my routing script has to change the transport protocol to SCTP. I tried to do it by using the t_relay(proto:server:port) version, but although it worked fine on my tests, when I used in my real case (which has not a predefined server to use as a literal) I found out that OpenSIPS give an error on StartUp-time complaining about the config file. So I assume it tries to eval the string at start up, and every way tried (“sctp:” + $od + “:” + $oP, or simply “sctp:$od:$oP”)… none have worked. But, when I tried to just concatenate the transport clause to $du, it worked just fine. *$du = "sip:" + $od + ":" + $op + ";transport=sctp";* The thing is, that was on 1.9.1. But now I got a pretty new 2.1.2 version running on a test environment in order to see how would it be to migrate to a newer version… and as odd as it may be, the transport clause has no effect in the relay anymore (it keeps it in UDP instead). Am I doing something wrong? The t_relay(proto:server:port) still seem to not work with anything other than literal strings, and I really need to be able to convert the request to sctp in this scenario. Thanks. ___ Users mailing list Users@lists.opensips.org http://lists.opensips.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users ___ Users mailing list Users@lists.opensips.org http://lists.opensips.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users
Re: [OpenSIPS-Users] dispatcher with t_relay performance
Oh, I thought it was a typo, 200,000 CPS ! Well I'd say to not spend much
time thinking about t_relay() rather spend energy on designing an
architecture that can give you the flexibility and scalability options.
For example:
A DNS SRV pointing to a layer of stateless dispatcher OpenSIPS. These
stateless OpenSIPS just don't care about any business logic just do a rough
load-balancing and "redirect" to the second layer OpenSIPS.
The second layer of OpenSIPS do the business logic and stay in call i.e use
t_relay()
That is a simple example in which you can add as many OpenSIPS at both
layers to manage your 200K CPS.
There could be way too many different ways of handling your 200K CPS load,
it all depends on your business logic, type of SIP requests and calls etc,
location of the end users/regions, methods to tweak your business logic i.e
use of caches and NoSQL DBs, and so much that only you may know at this
point.
Please go through this link: http://www.opensips.org/About/PerformanceTests
to see results for different types of configurations. However, do keep in
mind that those results may be done on older versions of OpenSIPS and you
may want to stress test your setup separately to know what are your
capabilities.
Regards,
Sammy
On Mon, Mar 7, 2016 at 8:54 AM, Satish Patel wrote:
> We have 200,000 CPS and more in future. Just worried about t_relay() and
> its performance. Any idea?
>
> --
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> On Mar 6, 2016, at 2:44 PM, SamyGo wrote:
>
> I'd ask you to read difference between Load_balancer and Dispatcher
> module. Dispatcher module is not an accurate measure but it is the only
> option when it comes to load balancing REGISTER requests.
>
> Dispatcher is hence very light weight as compared to Load Balancer. For a
> 200 CPS calls Load Balancer or Dispatcehr won't be putting any bigger
> impact relative to the business logic itself. For example doing alot of DB
> queries, engaging various other modules etc these things really define how
> light or heavy your system is going to be.
>
> Regards,
> Sammy
>
>
> On Sun, Mar 6, 2016 at 10:36 AM, Satish Patel
> wrote:
>
>> Any thought on it???
>>
>> On Fri, Mar 4, 2016 at 1:30 PM, Satish Patel
>> wrote:
>> > We have dispatcher and we are using very simple code block like
>> following
>> >
>> > if (method=="REGISTER" || method=="INVITE" ) {
>> > ds_select_dst("1", "2");
>> > t_relay();
>> >}
>> >
>> > Does t_relay will keep all transaction in memory? and what will be the
>> > performance issue? we have ~200k cps calls.. what will be the impact?
>>
>> ___
>> Users mailing list
>> Users@lists.opensips.org
>> http://lists.opensips.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users
>>
>
> ___
> Users mailing list
> Users@lists.opensips.org
> http://lists.opensips.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users
>
>
> ___
> Users mailing list
> Users@lists.opensips.org
> http://lists.opensips.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users
>
>
___
Users mailing list
Users@lists.opensips.org
http://lists.opensips.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users
Re: [OpenSIPS-Users] dispatcher with t_relay performance
Before LB was stateless and it was working fine. but we added new NIC
on this and enabled mhomed=1 and it broke routing because coun't
figure out right socket.. so i changed forward() to t_relay() and it
works fine again.. now my question is does t_relay() impact
performance... or any kind of issue? to having stateful LB ?
On Mon, Mar 7, 2016 at 10:35 AM, SamyGo wrote:
> Oh, I thought it was a typo, 200,000 CPS ! Well I'd say to not spend much
> time thinking about t_relay() rather spend energy on designing an
> architecture that can give you the flexibility and scalability options.
>
> For example:
> A DNS SRV pointing to a layer of stateless dispatcher OpenSIPS. These
> stateless OpenSIPS just don't care about any business logic just do a rough
> load-balancing and "redirect" to the second layer OpenSIPS.
> The second layer of OpenSIPS do the business logic and stay in call i.e use
> t_relay()
>
> That is a simple example in which you can add as many OpenSIPS at both
> layers to manage your 200K CPS.
>
> There could be way too many different ways of handling your 200K CPS load,
> it all depends on your business logic, type of SIP requests and calls etc,
> location of the end users/regions, methods to tweak your business logic i.e
> use of caches and NoSQL DBs, and so much that only you may know at this
> point.
>
> Please go through this link: http://www.opensips.org/About/PerformanceTests
> to see results for different types of configurations. However, do keep in
> mind that those results may be done on older versions of OpenSIPS and you
> may want to stress test your setup separately to know what are your
> capabilities.
>
> Regards,
> Sammy
>
>
>
> On Mon, Mar 7, 2016 at 8:54 AM, Satish Patel wrote:
>>
>> We have 200,000 CPS and more in future. Just worried about t_relay() and
>> its performance. Any idea?
>>
>> --
>> Sent from my iPhone
>>
>> On Mar 6, 2016, at 2:44 PM, SamyGo wrote:
>>
>> I'd ask you to read difference between Load_balancer and Dispatcher
>> module. Dispatcher module is not an accurate measure but it is the only
>> option when it comes to load balancing REGISTER requests.
>>
>> Dispatcher is hence very light weight as compared to Load Balancer. For a
>> 200 CPS calls Load Balancer or Dispatcehr won't be putting any bigger impact
>> relative to the business logic itself. For example doing alot of DB queries,
>> engaging various other modules etc these things really define how light or
>> heavy your system is going to be.
>>
>> Regards,
>> Sammy
>>
>>
>> On Sun, Mar 6, 2016 at 10:36 AM, Satish Patel
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> Any thought on it???
>>>
>>> On Fri, Mar 4, 2016 at 1:30 PM, Satish Patel
>>> wrote:
>>> > We have dispatcher and we are using very simple code block like
>>> > following
>>> >
>>> > if (method=="REGISTER" || method=="INVITE" ) {
>>> > ds_select_dst("1", "2");
>>> > t_relay();
>>> >}
>>> >
>>> > Does t_relay will keep all transaction in memory? and what will be the
>>> > performance issue? we have ~200k cps calls.. what will be the impact?
>>>
>>> ___
>>> Users mailing list
>>> Users@lists.opensips.org
>>> http://lists.opensips.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users
>>
>>
>> ___
>> Users mailing list
>> Users@lists.opensips.org
>> http://lists.opensips.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users
>>
>>
>> ___
>> Users mailing list
>> Users@lists.opensips.org
>> http://lists.opensips.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users
>>
>
>
> ___
> Users mailing list
> Users@lists.opensips.org
> http://lists.opensips.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users
>
___
Users mailing list
Users@lists.opensips.org
http://lists.opensips.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users
Re: [OpenSIPS-Users] dispatcher with t_relay performance
Hi, SamyGo
I have seen many people doing two layer opensips setup. First layer as
stateless dispatcher and other layer for business logic.
I just wonder why not just one layer of opensips doing business logic. I am
unable to understand this two layer concept.
Can you explain this a bit.
Thanks in advance.
On 7 March 2016 at 20:35, SamyGo wrote:
> Oh, I thought it was a typo, 200,000 CPS ! Well I'd say to not spend much
> time thinking about t_relay() rather spend energy on designing an
> architecture that can give you the flexibility and scalability options.
>
> For example:
> A DNS SRV pointing to a layer of stateless dispatcher OpenSIPS. These
> stateless OpenSIPS just don't care about any business logic just do a rough
> load-balancing and "redirect" to the second layer OpenSIPS.
> The second layer of OpenSIPS do the business logic and stay in call i.e
> use t_relay()
>
> That is a simple example in which you can add as many OpenSIPS at both
> layers to manage your 200K CPS.
>
> There could be way too many different ways of handling your 200K CPS load,
> it all depends on your business logic, type of SIP requests and calls etc,
> location of the end users/regions, methods to tweak your business logic i.e
> use of caches and NoSQL DBs, and so much that only you may know at this
> point.
>
> Please go through this link:
> http://www.opensips.org/About/PerformanceTests to see results for
> different types of configurations. However, do keep in mind that those
> results may be done on older versions of OpenSIPS and you may want to
> stress test your setup separately to know what are your capabilities.
>
> Regards,
> Sammy
>
>
>
> On Mon, Mar 7, 2016 at 8:54 AM, Satish Patel wrote:
>
>> We have 200,000 CPS and more in future. Just worried about t_relay() and
>> its performance. Any idea?
>>
>> --
>> Sent from my iPhone
>>
>> On Mar 6, 2016, at 2:44 PM, SamyGo wrote:
>>
>> I'd ask you to read difference between Load_balancer and Dispatcher
>> module. Dispatcher module is not an accurate measure but it is the only
>> option when it comes to load balancing REGISTER requests.
>>
>> Dispatcher is hence very light weight as compared to Load Balancer. For a
>> 200 CPS calls Load Balancer or Dispatcehr won't be putting any bigger
>> impact relative to the business logic itself. For example doing alot of DB
>> queries, engaging various other modules etc these things really define how
>> light or heavy your system is going to be.
>>
>> Regards,
>> Sammy
>>
>>
>> On Sun, Mar 6, 2016 at 10:36 AM, Satish Patel
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Any thought on it???
>>>
>>> On Fri, Mar 4, 2016 at 1:30 PM, Satish Patel
>>> wrote:
>>> > We have dispatcher and we are using very simple code block like
>>> following
>>> >
>>> > if (method=="REGISTER" || method=="INVITE" ) {
>>> > ds_select_dst("1", "2");
>>> > t_relay();
>>> >}
>>> >
>>> > Does t_relay will keep all transaction in memory? and what will be the
>>> > performance issue? we have ~200k cps calls.. what will be the impact?
>>>
>>> ___
>>> Users mailing list
>>> Users@lists.opensips.org
>>> http://lists.opensips.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users
>>>
>>
>> ___
>> Users mailing list
>> Users@lists.opensips.org
>> http://lists.opensips.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users
>>
>>
>> ___
>> Users mailing list
>> Users@lists.opensips.org
>> http://lists.opensips.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users
>>
>>
>
> ___
> Users mailing list
> Users@lists.opensips.org
> http://lists.opensips.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users
>
>
___
Users mailing list
Users@lists.opensips.org
http://lists.opensips.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users
Re: [OpenSIPS-Users] dispatcher with t_relay performance
Hi Satesh,
So I'm not sure what you're talking about - did you post in mailing list
about the problem. Was it something that can't be done or has no answer to
it ? Were some other alterations tried to the approach ?
As far as I know even if you multi-home an opensips you can still
force_send_socket() and if it is not forced then Operating System tells the
correct interface to use to send packets out. Right now I can only assume
things.
@Aqs, given your own experiences and engagement in the mailing list I don't
think there is any big thing to explain in there.
The First layer is nothing but a dispatcher loaded in it pointing to N
number of servers.
Take an example: http://www.opensips.org/Documentation/Tutorials-Redirect
Now modify it to use dispatcher,
request_route {
...
if(!ds_select_dst("1","4")) { /* See new version of
ds_select_dst(), there are partitions involved etc */
sl_send_reply("503","Service Unavailable");
}
/* modify Contact Header... */
sl_send_reply("302","Moved Temporarily");
}
And I think thats pretty much it, the Sender will get a 302, with a new
Contact header and then it is supposed to talk to that new server.
Again its the business logic and depends from usage to usage. This is not
the only way to increase capacity or efficiency. Sometimes UACs/UASs don't
like Redirecting and this method flops.
Regards,
sammy
On Mon, Mar 7, 2016 at 3:14 PM, Aqs Younas wrote:
> Hi, SamyGo
>
> I have seen many people doing two layer opensips setup. First layer as
> stateless dispatcher and other layer for business logic.
> I just wonder why not just one layer of opensips doing business logic. I
> am unable to understand this two layer concept.
>
> Can you explain this a bit.
>
> Thanks in advance.
>
>
> On 7 March 2016 at 20:35, SamyGo wrote:
>
>> Oh, I thought it was a typo, 200,000 CPS ! Well I'd say to not spend much
>> time thinking about t_relay() rather spend energy on designing an
>> architecture that can give you the flexibility and scalability options.
>>
>> For example:
>> A DNS SRV pointing to a layer of stateless dispatcher OpenSIPS. These
>> stateless OpenSIPS just don't care about any business logic just do a rough
>> load-balancing and "redirect" to the second layer OpenSIPS.
>> The second layer of OpenSIPS do the business logic and stay in call i.e
>> use t_relay()
>>
>> That is a simple example in which you can add as many OpenSIPS at both
>> layers to manage your 200K CPS.
>>
>> There could be way too many different ways of handling your 200K CPS
>> load, it all depends on your business logic, type of SIP requests and calls
>> etc, location of the end users/regions, methods to tweak your business
>> logic i.e use of caches and NoSQL DBs, and so much that only you may know
>> at this point.
>>
>> Please go through this link:
>> http://www.opensips.org/About/PerformanceTests to see results for
>> different types of configurations. However, do keep in mind that those
>> results may be done on older versions of OpenSIPS and you may want to
>> stress test your setup separately to know what are your capabilities.
>>
>> Regards,
>> Sammy
>>
>>
>>
>> On Mon, Mar 7, 2016 at 8:54 AM, Satish Patel
>> wrote:
>>
>>> We have 200,000 CPS and more in future. Just worried about t_relay() and
>>> its performance. Any idea?
>>>
>>> --
>>> Sent from my iPhone
>>>
>>> On Mar 6, 2016, at 2:44 PM, SamyGo wrote:
>>>
>>> I'd ask you to read difference between Load_balancer and Dispatcher
>>> module. Dispatcher module is not an accurate measure but it is the only
>>> option when it comes to load balancing REGISTER requests.
>>>
>>> Dispatcher is hence very light weight as compared to Load Balancer. For
>>> a 200 CPS calls Load Balancer or Dispatcehr won't be putting any bigger
>>> impact relative to the business logic itself. For example doing alot of DB
>>> queries, engaging various other modules etc these things really define how
>>> light or heavy your system is going to be.
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>> Sammy
>>>
>>>
>>> On Sun, Mar 6, 2016 at 10:36 AM, Satish Patel
>>> wrote:
>>>
Any thought on it???
On Fri, Mar 4, 2016 at 1:30 PM, Satish Patel
wrote:
> We have dispatcher and we are using very simple code block like
following
>
> if (method=="REGISTER" || method=="INVITE" ) {
> ds_select_dst("1", "2");
> t_relay();
>}
>
> Does t_relay will keep all transaction in memory? and what will be the
> performance issue? we have ~200k cps calls.. what will be the impact?
___
Users mailing list
Users@lists.opensips.org
http://lists.opensips.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users
>>>
>>> ___
>>> Users mailing list
>>> Users@lists.opensips.org
>>> http://lists.opensips.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users
>>>
>>>
>>> ___
Re: [OpenSIPS-Users] mhome asymmetric port issue
Hi Satish,
I can't understand this:
"*...use t_relay() in dispatcher then its consuming REGISTER packet and
sending AUTH challenge to client instead **of sending that REGISTER to
backend dispatcher..*"
t_relay has nothing to do with "consuming" REGISTER packets. I've done it
so many times, the AUTH must be coming from your backend servers.
Please take a packet capture on ALL of your interfaces you must be looking
at the one interface where client is sending packets to and hence makes you
think that OpenSIPS is sending AUTH.
Regards,
Sammy
On Thu, Mar 3, 2016 at 5:22 PM, Satish Patel wrote:
> Thanks Razvan,
>
> Problem is we have legacy application running on ser-0.10 older
> version and we have did lots of other customization in ser I tried to
> use force_send_socket() but look like that support isn't in RR module.
>
> if i enable "mhomed=1" and use t_relay() in dispatcher then its
> consuming REGISTER packet and sending AUTH challenge to client instead
> of sending that REGISTER to backend dispatcher..
>
> if i use forward(uri:host, uri:port); function then it doesn't
> understand socket correctly. atleast t_relay() is working but
> consuming REGISTER, we have very simple code like following
>
> else if ( (method=="REGISTER") || (method=="INVITE") ) {
> if ( !ds_select_dst("2", "2") ) {
> xlog("L_ERR", "Unable to route REGISTER\n");
> sl_send_reply("500","Unable to route REGISTER");
> break;
> }
> ..
> ..
> t_relay()
>
> On Thu, Mar 3, 2016 at 3:39 AM, Răzvan Crainea
> wrote:
> > Hi, Satish!
> >
> > By default, OpenSIPS uses the same interface to send the reply. However,
> > when using mhomed=1, the operating system decides where the reply should
> be
> > sent to. And in your case, the operating system simply chooses a
> different
> > interface. So it seems this is the normal behavior, there's nothing
> wrong.
> > If you really want to use the same interface for replies, you should use
> the
> > force_send_socket() function to set the desired interface.
> >
> > Best regards,
> > Răzvan
> >
> >
> > On 03/02/2016 11:10 PM, Satish Patel wrote:
> >>
> >> mhome=1
> >> listen=udp:10.0.0.1:6060 udp:10.0.0.1:5060 udp:192.168.100.1:6060
> >> udp:192.168.100.1:5060
> >>
> >> From client when i send REGISTER to 5060 then server sending reply
> >> back using port 6060, it should send reply back client using 5060
> >> right???
> >>
> >> If i use mhome=0 everything works!
> >>
> >> ___
> >> Users mailing list
> >> Users@lists.opensips.org
> >> http://lists.opensips.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users
> >
> >
> > --
> > Răzvan Crainea
> > OpenSIPS Core Developer
> > http://www.opensips-solutions.com
> >
> >
> > ___
> > Users mailing list
> > Users@lists.opensips.org
> > http://lists.opensips.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users
>
> ___
> Users mailing list
> Users@lists.opensips.org
> http://lists.opensips.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users
>
___
Users mailing list
Users@lists.opensips.org
http://lists.opensips.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users
Re: [OpenSIPS-Users] dispatcher with t_relay performance
May be i was unable to explain my question fully. I was thinking in other
direction.
Anyway Thank you.
On 8 March 2016 at 03:25, SamyGo wrote:
> Hi Satesh,
>
> So I'm not sure what you're talking about - did you post in mailing list
> about the problem. Was it something that can't be done or has no answer to
> it ? Were some other alterations tried to the approach ?
>
> As far as I know even if you multi-home an opensips you can still
> force_send_socket() and if it is not forced then Operating System tells the
> correct interface to use to send packets out. Right now I can only assume
> things.
>
> @Aqs, given your own experiences and engagement in the mailing list I
> don't think there is any big thing to explain in there.
>
> The First layer is nothing but a dispatcher loaded in it pointing to N
> number of servers.
> Take an example: http://www.opensips.org/Documentation/Tutorials-Redirect
>
> Now modify it to use dispatcher,
>
> request_route {
> ...
>if(!ds_select_dst("1","4")) { /* See new version of
> ds_select_dst(), there are partitions involved etc */
> sl_send_reply("503","Service Unavailable");
>}
>
>/* modify Contact Header... */
>
>sl_send_reply("302","Moved Temporarily");
> }
>
> And I think thats pretty much it, the Sender will get a 302, with a new
> Contact header and then it is supposed to talk to that new server.
> Again its the business logic and depends from usage to usage. This is not
> the only way to increase capacity or efficiency. Sometimes UACs/UASs don't
> like Redirecting and this method flops.
>
> Regards,
> sammy
>
>
> On Mon, Mar 7, 2016 at 3:14 PM, Aqs Younas wrote:
>
>> Hi, SamyGo
>>
>> I have seen many people doing two layer opensips setup. First layer as
>> stateless dispatcher and other layer for business logic.
>> I just wonder why not just one layer of opensips doing business logic. I
>> am unable to understand this two layer concept.
>>
>> Can you explain this a bit.
>>
>> Thanks in advance.
>>
>>
>> On 7 March 2016 at 20:35, SamyGo wrote:
>>
>>> Oh, I thought it was a typo, 200,000 CPS ! Well I'd say to not spend
>>> much time thinking about t_relay() rather spend energy on designing an
>>> architecture that can give you the flexibility and scalability options.
>>>
>>> For example:
>>> A DNS SRV pointing to a layer of stateless dispatcher OpenSIPS. These
>>> stateless OpenSIPS just don't care about any business logic just do a rough
>>> load-balancing and "redirect" to the second layer OpenSIPS.
>>> The second layer of OpenSIPS do the business logic and stay in call i.e
>>> use t_relay()
>>>
>>> That is a simple example in which you can add as many OpenSIPS at both
>>> layers to manage your 200K CPS.
>>>
>>> There could be way too many different ways of handling your 200K CPS
>>> load, it all depends on your business logic, type of SIP requests and calls
>>> etc, location of the end users/regions, methods to tweak your business
>>> logic i.e use of caches and NoSQL DBs, and so much that only you may know
>>> at this point.
>>>
>>> Please go through this link:
>>> http://www.opensips.org/About/PerformanceTests to see results for
>>> different types of configurations. However, do keep in mind that those
>>> results may be done on older versions of OpenSIPS and you may want to
>>> stress test your setup separately to know what are your capabilities.
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>> Sammy
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Mon, Mar 7, 2016 at 8:54 AM, Satish Patel
>>> wrote:
>>>
We have 200,000 CPS and more in future. Just worried about t_relay()
and its performance. Any idea?
--
Sent from my iPhone
On Mar 6, 2016, at 2:44 PM, SamyGo wrote:
I'd ask you to read difference between Load_balancer and Dispatcher
module. Dispatcher module is not an accurate measure but it is the only
option when it comes to load balancing REGISTER requests.
Dispatcher is hence very light weight as compared to Load Balancer. For
a 200 CPS calls Load Balancer or Dispatcehr won't be putting any bigger
impact relative to the business logic itself. For example doing alot of DB
queries, engaging various other modules etc these things really define how
light or heavy your system is going to be.
Regards,
Sammy
On Sun, Mar 6, 2016 at 10:36 AM, Satish Patel
wrote:
> Any thought on it???
>
> On Fri, Mar 4, 2016 at 1:30 PM, Satish Patel
> wrote:
> > We have dispatcher and we are using very simple code block like
> following
> >
> > if (method=="REGISTER" || method=="INVITE" ) {
> > ds_select_dst("1", "2");
> > t_relay();
> >}
> >
> > Does t_relay will keep all transaction in memory? and what will be
> the
> > performance issue? we have ~200k cps calls.. what will be the
> impact?
>
> ___
> Users mai
Re: [OpenSIPS-Users] E_DLG_STATE_CHANGED in event route
Thanks so much. ___ Users mailing list Users@lists.opensips.org http://lists.opensips.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users
