On Jul 18, 2010, at 3:34 PM, "m...@grounded.net" <m...@grounded.net>
wrote:
I very badly need to make sure that a server is always present, that
VM is always available. Even if it means dropped calls when failing
over to another server, that would be acceptable.
I had considered going with DRBD to allow for full failover redundancy
in my setup. However, I ended up opting for the standard sipX HA setup
for now, but I have until mid-August before I have to commit to one or
the other. I may test out DRBD with sipX to see if works like I would
expect. Something like that may be an option for you.
Cheers,
Jeremy
--
Jeremy Fluhmann
Technology Director
Winters ISD
Futuristic - Analytical - Ideation - Relator - Learner
http://jfluhmann.edublogs.org
I've asked about fail over in the past and wondering if anyone has
worked on such a beast to date?
HA to me always means having fully separate servers without one main
controller.
For example, web servers should have fail over front end load
balancers to multiple back end servers.
In the case of sipx, even some fail over would be good. I think I've
asked about this before, what if the database server, the config
files and the vm directories were centralized.
I'm almost sure I'll get grief over asking again but we're up to
4.2.1 now, maybe things have changed, and this could be done.
Has anyone tried this? Thought I would refresh this question in case
something new has come.
Mike
_______________________________________________
sipx-users mailing list sipx-users@list.sipfoundry.org
List Archive: http://list.sipfoundry.org/archive/sipx-users
Unsubscribe: http://list.sipfoundry.org/mailman/listinfo/sipx-users
sipXecs IP PBX -- http://www.sipfoundry.org/
