Hi James, I'd like to avoid front-ending the FS boxes and instead have them load-share amongst themselves or sit in a hot/standby arrangement while updating the other box(es) with call state and configuration changes. They would be connected directly via a closed tertiary network so that the heartbeat could be set to a very low value, and call state data would not traverse the same path as the call traffic. Am I just dreaming? Could a standby box take over call in progress when the primary fails? Thanks, Tom On Tue, Aug 26, 2008 at 9:25 PM, James Green <james.green@stealthnet.net> wrote:
Tom Warren wrote:
I'd like to know if there is any plan for an HA solution for FreeSWITCH. I know the 'heartbeat' trick, but is there or will there be any way to mirror the configuration changes and even call state between two boxes in a sort of clustered arrangement?
I don't think there's anything out of the box. I would imagine, much as you can do with web servers, some form of R-R DNS exposing some proxies that connect to 2+ FreeSWITCH/other boxen would essentially do the trick.
The tricky part would be getting any new machines to announce themselves to the proxies and getting the proxies to remove machines now out of service. I'll be looking into that later...
James
_______________________________________________ Freeswitch-users mailing list Freeswitch-users@lists.freeswitch.org http://lists.freeswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/freeswitch-users UNSUBSCRIBE:http://lists.freeswitch.org/mailman/options/freeswitch-users http://www.freeswitch.org