Dale,

That is what we are doing (chroot for each instance), the port binding issue
with the acd/presence server is really the only problem we have to
deployment. You can easily change the Listen 80 to Listen 10.1.2.3:80 in
Apache to force it to bind to an IP, likewise with postgresql. The only
other issue might be if any sipx components use loopback for something and
there is a port conflict. Other than that, you can pretty much have multiple
sipx instances using chroot, without the overhead of VM.

On Mon, Aug 18, 2008 at 12:28 PM, Dale Worley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> On Mon, 2008-08-18 at 11:52 +0800, Jeremy A wrote:
> > Even if you can get the addresses bound correctly I guess that the
> > real problem will be how to create the databases and configuration
> > files per instance.
> >
> > However, perhaps that could be sorted by creating different chroot
> > environments for each instance?
>
> Hmmm, I've never thought of that.  But chroot'ing gets around the fact
> that the various executables have compiled-in file paths.
>
> Of course, you have to configure each sipX to use a different set of
> ports.  But I think that all port usages are properly driven by the
> config files.
>
> The difficulty is running sipXconfig, Postgres, and Apache separately
> for each sipX, since Postgres and Apache use ports as well.  They're
> probably configurable, though.
>
> Dale
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> sipx-users mailing list
> [email protected]
> List Archive: http://list.sipfoundry.org/archive/sipx-users
> Unsubscribe: http://list.sipfoundry.org/mailman/listinfo/sipx-users
>
_______________________________________________
sipx-users mailing list
[email protected]
List Archive: http://list.sipfoundry.org/archive/sipx-users
Unsubscribe: http://list.sipfoundry.org/mailman/listinfo/sipx-users

Reply via email to