@wdoekes , what about a different approach on this matter - instead of keep
filtering per IP each time we want to ping, what about using a server ID and
each usrloc should be marked with such ID representing the server which did
handle that register ? So, at the end, whatever number of
That would suit my needs indeed; and make more sense than the awkward query
that we do now.
Thinking out loud here: where do we get this ID from? Do we add a `server_id`
integer parameter to `usrloc`? Or should we generate one automatically? If we
use a parameter and default it to `1`, we get
@wdoekes , I'm seeing this from a larger perspective - we are working on the
specs/description for a cluster module - to ensure registration and call
exchange (in a transparent way) between several opensips instances. So, we will
define a server ID for each opensips (an ID inside the cluster),
For the record. This should probably be improved to handle in-memory contacts
as well, since this can now be binary-replicated (right?)
16:28 lirakis bogdan_vs, if there was a smart nat ping ... then i think
you could do distributed usrloc out of the box with replication, path headers,
and a
@@ -130,6 +131,18 @@ static int get_all_db_ucontacts(void *buf, int len,
unsigned int flags,
LM_DBG(buf: %p. flags: %d\n, buf, flags);
+ if (sockaddr_list_str.s) {
+ i = snprintf(query_socket, sizeof(query_socket), and socket
in (%.*s),
I can't find the spec
@@ -130,6 +131,18 @@ static int get_all_db_ucontacts(void *buf, int len,
unsigned int flags,
LM_DBG(buf: %p. flags: %d\n, buf, flags);
+ if (sockaddr_list_str.s) {
+ i = snprintf(query_socket, sizeof(query_socket), and socket
in (%.*s),
Is this IN operator
