Hello. I currently have a project where I'm researching how to establish a clustered platform wieth failover time ~= some milliseconds. At present we have: 2 identical servers FS, wieth established Pacemaker (http://www.clusterlabs.org/wiki/Install#From_Source) - heartbeat. On the one hand it is possible to tell that all works, as, at refusal of the first server, the second server receives cluster-ip. A problem that FreeSWITCH it is necessary to restart (or simply to start) that it began to work with the new IP-address. As the result, a switching total time makes 10-20 sec which basic part is necessary on launch FreeSwitch. any ideas? Thanks.
instead of stopping/starting FS, why not stop/start just the appropriate sofia profile? That should be much faster. You can script it using fs_cli -x "sofia ..." On Thu, Jul 8, 2010 at 5:11 AM, viewpoint <yurazilot1@list.ru> wrote:
Hello.
I currently have a project where I'm researching how to establish a clustered platform wieth failover time ~= some milliseconds.
At present we have: 2 identical servers FS, wieth established Pacemaker ( http://www.clusterlabs.org/wiki/Install#From_Source) - heartbeat. On the one hand it is possible to tell that all works, as, at refusal of the first server, the second server receives cluster-ip. A problem that FreeSWITCH it is necessary to restart (or simply to start) that it began to work with the new IP-address. As the result, a switching total time makes 10-20 sec which basic part is necessary on launch FreeSwitch.
any ideas?
Thanks.
_______________________________________________ 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
-- -Rupa
Or use sysctl to set net.ipv4.ip_nonlocal_bind = 1 That will allow FS to bind to the IP even when it does not have that IP. It won't receive traffic until the machine takes control of that IP, but will allow FS to start up before that time so that it'll start handling calls as soon as it fails over. You could also look at an approach like this http://wiki.freeswitch.org/wiki/Enterprise_deployment_OpenSIPS if you have another couple of servers available. -Steve On 8 July 2010 14:53, Rupa Schomaker <rupa@rupa.com> wrote:
instead of stopping/starting FS, why not stop/start just the appropriate sofia profile? That should be much faster. You can script it using fs_cli -x "sofia ..."
On Thu, Jul 8, 2010 at 5:11 AM, viewpoint <yurazilot1@list.ru> wrote:
Hello.
I currently have a project where I'm researching how to establish a clustered platform wieth failover time ~= some milliseconds.
At present we have: 2 identical servers FS, wieth established Pacemaker ( http://www.clusterlabs.org/wiki/Install#From_Source) - heartbeat. On the one hand it is possible to tell that all works, as, at refusal of the first server, the second server receives cluster-ip. A problem that FreeSWITCH it is necessary to restart (or simply to start) that it began to work with the new IP-address. As the result, a switching total time makes 10-20 sec which basic part is necessary on launch FreeSwitch.
any ideas?
Thanks.
_______________________________________________ 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
-- -Rupa
_______________________________________________ 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
It has appeared so simply... All works! Thank you! Thu, 8 Jul 2010 08:53:38 -0500 письмо от Rupa Schomaker <rupa@rupa.com>:
instead of stopping/starting FS, why not stop/start just the appropriate sofia profile? ?That should be much faster. ?You can script it using fs_cli -x "sofia ..."
On Thu, Jul 8, 2010 at 5:11 AM, viewpoint <yurazilot1@list.ru> wrote: Hello.
I currently have a project where I'm researching how to establish a clustered platform wieth failover time ~= some milliseconds.
At present we have: 2 identical servers FS, wieth established Pacemaker (http://www.clusterlabs.org/wiki/Install#From_Source) - heartbeat. On the one hand it is possible to tell that all works, as, at refusal of the first server, the second server receives cluster-ip. A problem that FreeSWITCH it is necessary to restart (or simply to start) that it began to work with the new IP-address. As the result, a switching total time makes 10-20 sec which basic part is necessary on launch FreeSwitch.
any ideas?
Thanks.
_______________________________________________ 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
-- -Rupa _______________________________________________ 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
Я в Моем Мире - http://my.mail.ru/list/yurazilot1/
Hi On linux you can use /proc/sys/net/ipv4/ip_nonlocal_bind to bind to non local address on start of FS and then you don't need any restart of FS or reload of sofia profile if this addres is active on the node or you can have this floating address on dummy iface ( or lo ) and then use right settings in /proc/sys/net/ipv4/conf/eth?/arp_filter,arp_ignore and then FS can use this address to bind on start and you don't need restart of FS or relaod of sofia profile ... Kleo On Thu, 8 Jul 2010, viewpoint wrote:
Hello.
I currently have a project where I'm researching how to establish a clustered platform wieth failover time ~= some milliseconds.
At present we have: 2 identical servers FS, wieth established Pacemaker (http://www.clusterlabs.org/wiki/Install#From_Source) - heartbeat. On the one hand it is possible to tell that all works, as, at refusal of the first server, the second server receives cluster-ip. A problem that FreeSWITCH it is necessary to restart (or simply to start) that it began to work with the new IP-address. As the result, a switching total time makes 10-20 sec which basic part is necessary on launch FreeSwitch.
any ideas?
Thanks.
-- klejch+freeswitch@netbox.cz
Many thanks for fast and substantial answers! Has established ipv4.ip_nonlocal_bind=1. Now there is no necessity to reboot FS or sofia profile. As a result it has turned out: 1) Two servers FS which kernel works with the shared db through unix ODBC 2) It Is realised Cluster-IP by installations Pacemaker (http://www.clusterlabs.org/wiki/Install#From_Source) As server FS work with share db, there is an impression that at switching Cluster-IP with active on a passive, passive server can pick up session begun on an active server (the necessary data about current sessions takes from the share db). Whether So it? Testing has shown that at switching Cluster-IP on reserve FS, that does not process session which have begun on first FS :( Thu, 8 Jul 2010 16:21:40 +0200 (CEST) письмо от Vladimir Klejch <klejch+freeswitch@netbox.cz>:
Hi
On linux you can use /proc/sys/net/ipv4/ip_nonlocal_bind to bind to non local address on start of FS and then you don't need any restart of FS or reload of sofia profile if this addres is active on the node
or you can have this floating address on dummy iface (?or lo ) and then use right settings in /proc/sys/net/ipv4/conf/eth?/arp_filter,arp_ignore and then FS can use this address to bind on start and you don't need restart of FS?or relaod of sofia profile ...
Kleo
On Thu, 8 Jul 2010, viewpoint wrote:
Hello.
I currently have a project where I'm researching how to establish a clustered platform wieth failover time ~= some milliseconds.
At present we have: 2 identical servers FS, wieth established Pacemaker (http://www.clusterlabs.org/wiki/Install#From_Source) - heartbeat. On the one hand it is possible to tell that all works, as, at refusal of the first server, the second server receives cluster-ip. A problem that FreeSWITCH it is necessary to restart (or simply to start) that it began to work with the new IP-address. As the result, a switching total time makes 10-20 sec which basic part is necessary on launch FreeSwitch.
any ideas?
Thanks.
-- klejch+freeswitch@netbox.cz
_______________________________________________ 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
Я в Моем Мире - http://my.mail.ru/list/yurazilot1/
"As server FS work with share db, there is an impression that at switching Cluster-IP with active on a passive, passive server can pick up session begun on an active server (the necessary data about current sessions takes from the share db). Whether So it? Testing has shown that at switching Cluster-IP on reserve FS, that does not process session which have begun on first FS :(" Sorry, but that's not currently possible as the call state information is held in memory, not the shared database, and has execution threads started for processing the signalling/media which aren't duplicated on the other machine(s). -Steve 2010/7/9 viewpoint <yurazilot1@list.ru>
Many thanks for fast and substantial answers! Has established ipv4.ip_nonlocal_bind=1. Now there is no necessity to reboot FS or sofia profile.
As a result it has turned out: 1) Two servers FS which kernel works with the shared db through unix ODBC 2) It Is realised Cluster-IP by installations Pacemaker (http://www.clusterlabs.org/wiki/Install#From_Source)
As server FS work with share db, there is an impression that at switching Cluster-IP with active on a passive, passive server can pick up session begun on an active server (the necessary data about current sessions takes from the share db). Whether So it? Testing has shown that at switching Cluster-IP on reserve FS, that does not process session which have begun on first FS :(
Thu, 8 Jul 2010 16:21:40 +0200 (CEST) письмо от Vladimir Klejch < klejch+freeswitch@netbox.cz <klejch%2Bfreeswitch@netbox.cz>>:
Hi
On linux you can use /proc/sys/net/ipv4/ip_nonlocal_bind to bind to non
local
address on start of FS and then you don't need any restart of FS or reload of sofia profile if this addres is active on the node
or you can have this floating address on dummy iface (?or lo ) and then use right settings in /proc/sys/net/ipv4/conf/eth?/arp_filter,arp_ignore and then FS can use this address to bind on start and you don't need restart of FS?or relaod of sofia profile ...
Kleo
On Thu, 8 Jul 2010, viewpoint wrote:
Hello.
I currently have a project where I'm researching how to establish a clustered platform wieth failover time ~= some milliseconds.
At present we have: 2 identical servers FS, wieth established Pacemaker (http://www.clusterlabs.org/wiki/Install#From_Source) - heartbeat. On the one hand it is possible to tell that all works, as, at refusal of the first server, the second server receives cluster-ip. A problem that FreeSWITCH it is necessary to restart (or simply to start) that it began to work with the new IP-address. As the result, a switching total time makes 10-20 sec which basic part is necessary on launch FreeSwitch.
any ideas?
Thanks.
-- klejch+freeswitch@netbox.cz <klejch%2Bfreeswitch@netbox.cz>
_______________________________________________ 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
Я в Моем Мире - http://my.mail.ru/list/yurazilot1/
_______________________________________________ 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
Guys, further to this interesting discussion, please check out this wiki page http://wiki.freeswitch.org/wiki/Freeswitch_HA there was an announcement at cluecon that improves Freeswitches ability to do HA-clustering. please can you update this wiki page with the information you have learned doing the pacemaker side of this. also keep the conversation going now, with this new information :) Jay 2010/7/12 Steven Ayre <steveayre@gmail.com>
"As server FS work with share db, there is an impression that at switching Cluster-IP with active on a passive, passive server can pick up session begun on an active server (the necessary data about current sessions takes from the share db). Whether So it? Testing has shown that at switching Cluster-IP on reserve FS, that does not process session which have begun on first FS :("
Sorry, but that's not currently possible as the call state information is held in memory, not the shared database, and has execution threads started for processing the signalling/media which aren't duplicated on the other machine(s).
-Steve
2010/7/9 viewpoint <yurazilot1@list.ru>
Many thanks for fast and substantial answers!
Has established ipv4.ip_nonlocal_bind=1. Now there is no necessity to reboot FS or sofia profile.
As a result it has turned out: 1) Two servers FS which kernel works with the shared db through unix ODBC 2) It Is realised Cluster-IP by installations Pacemaker (http://www.clusterlabs.org/wiki/Install#From_Source)
As server FS work with share db, there is an impression that at switching Cluster-IP with active on a passive, passive server can pick up session begun on an active server (the necessary data about current sessions takes from the share db). Whether So it? Testing has shown that at switching Cluster-IP on reserve FS, that does not process session which have begun on first FS :(
Thu, 8 Jul 2010 16:21:40 +0200 (CEST) письмо от Vladimir Klejch < klejch+freeswitch@netbox.cz <klejch%2Bfreeswitch@netbox.cz>>:
Hi
On linux you can use /proc/sys/net/ipv4/ip_nonlocal_bind to bind to non
local
address on start of FS and then you don't need any restart of FS or reload of sofia profile if this addres is active on the node
or you can have this floating address on dummy iface (?or lo ) and then use right settings in /proc/sys/net/ipv4/conf/eth?/arp_filter,arp_ignore and then FS can use this address to bind on start and you don't need restart of FS?or relaod of sofia profile ...
Kleo
On Thu, 8 Jul 2010, viewpoint wrote:
Hello.
I currently have a project where I'm researching how to establish a clustered platform wieth failover time ~= some milliseconds.
At present we have: 2 identical servers FS, wieth established Pacemaker (http://www.clusterlabs.org/wiki/Install#From_Source) - heartbeat. On the one hand it is possible to tell that all works, as, at refusal of the first server, the second server receives cluster-ip. A problem that FreeSWITCH it is necessary to restart (or simply to start) that it began to work with the new IP-address. As the result, a switching total time makes 10-20 sec which basic part is necessary on launch FreeSwitch.
any ideas?
Thanks.
-- klejch+freeswitch@netbox.cz <klejch%2Bfreeswitch@netbox.cz>
_______________________________________________ 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
Я в Моем Мире - http://my.mail.ru/list/yurazilot1/
_______________________________________________ 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
_______________________________________________ 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
-- Sincerely Jay
On Wed, Aug 4, 2010 at 10:15 PM, jay binks <jaybinks@gmail.com> wrote:
Guys, further to this interesting discussion, please check out this wiki page http://wiki.freeswitch.org/wiki/Freeswitch_HA there was an announcement at cluecon that improves Freeswitches ability to do HA-clustering. please can you update this wiki page with the information you have learned doing the pacemaker side of this.
Just read the page... I can only say: WOOOW!
also keep the conversation going now, with this new information :) Jay
2010/7/12 Steven Ayre <steveayre@gmail.com>
"As server FS work with share db, there is an impression that at switching Cluster-IP with active on a passive, passive server can pick up session begun on an active server (the necessary data about current sessions takes from the share db). Whether So it? Testing has shown that at switching Cluster-IP on reserve FS, that does not process session which have begun on first FS :("
Sorry, but that's not currently possible as the call state information is held in memory, not the shared database, and has execution threads started for processing the signalling/media which aren't duplicated on the other machine(s).
-Steve
2010/7/9 viewpoint <yurazilot1@list.ru>
Many thanks for fast and substantial answers! Has established ipv4.ip_nonlocal_bind=1. Now there is no necessity to reboot FS or sofia profile.
As a result it has turned out: 1) Two servers FS which kernel works with the shared db through unix ODBC 2) It Is realised Cluster-IP by installations Pacemaker (http://www.clusterlabs.org/wiki/Install#From_Source)
As server FS work with share db, there is an impression that at switching Cluster-IP with active on a passive, passive server can pick up session begun on an active server (the necessary data about current sessions takes from the share db). Whether So it? Testing has shown that at switching Cluster-IP on reserve FS, that does not process session which have begun on first FS :(
Thu, 8 Jul 2010 16:21:40 +0200 (CEST) письмо от Vladimir Klejch <klejch+freeswitch@netbox.cz>:
Hi
On linux you can use /proc/sys/net/ipv4/ip_nonlocal_bind to bind to non local address on start of FS and then you don't need any restart of FS or reload of sofia profile if this addres is active on the node
or you can have this floating address on dummy iface (?or lo ) and then use right settings in /proc/sys/net/ipv4/conf/eth?/arp_filter,arp_ignore and then FS can use this address to bind on start and you don't need restart of FS?or relaod of sofia profile ...
Kleo
On Thu, 8 Jul 2010, viewpoint wrote:
Hello.
I currently have a project where I'm researching how to establish a clustered platform wieth failover time ~= some milliseconds.
At present we have: 2 identical servers FS, wieth established Pacemaker (http://www.clusterlabs.org/wiki/Install#From_Source) - heartbeat. On the one hand it is possible to tell that all works, as, at refusal of the first server, the second server receives cluster-ip. A problem that FreeSWITCH it is necessary to restart (or simply to start) that it began to work with the new IP-address. As the result, a switching total time makes 10-20 sec which basic part is necessary on launch FreeSwitch.
any ideas?
Thanks.
-- klejch+freeswitch@netbox.cz
_______________________________________________ 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
Я в Моем Мире - http://my.mail.ru/list/yurazilot1/
_______________________________________________ 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
_______________________________________________ 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
-- Sincerely
Jay
_______________________________________________ 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
-- Sincerely, Giovanni Maruzzelli Cell : +39-347-2665618
Cool! On 4 August 2010 21:15, jay binks <jaybinks@gmail.com> wrote:
Guys, further to this interesting discussion, please check out this wiki page
http://wiki.freeswitch.org/wiki/Freeswitch_HA
there was an announcement at cluecon that improves Freeswitches ability to do HA-clustering. please can you update this wiki page with the information you have learned doing the pacemaker side of this.
also keep the conversation going now, with this new information :)
Jay
2010/7/12 Steven Ayre <steveayre@gmail.com>
"As server FS work with share db, there is an impression that at switching
Cluster-IP with active on a passive, passive server can pick up session begun on an active server (the necessary data about current sessions takes from the share db). Whether So it? Testing has shown that at switching Cluster-IP on reserve FS, that does not process session which have begun on first FS :("
Sorry, but that's not currently possible as the call state information is held in memory, not the shared database, and has execution threads started for processing the signalling/media which aren't duplicated on the other machine(s).
-Steve
2010/7/9 viewpoint <yurazilot1@list.ru>
Many thanks for fast and substantial answers!
Has established ipv4.ip_nonlocal_bind=1. Now there is no necessity to reboot FS or sofia profile.
As a result it has turned out: 1) Two servers FS which kernel works with the shared db through unix ODBC 2) It Is realised Cluster-IP by installations Pacemaker (http://www.clusterlabs.org/wiki/Install#From_Source)
As server FS work with share db, there is an impression that at switching Cluster-IP with active on a passive, passive server can pick up session begun on an active server (the necessary data about current sessions takes from the share db). Whether So it? Testing has shown that at switching Cluster-IP on reserve FS, that does not process session which have begun on first FS :(
Thu, 8 Jul 2010 16:21:40 +0200 (CEST) письмо от Vladimir Klejch < klejch+freeswitch@netbox.cz <klejch%2Bfreeswitch@netbox.cz>>:
Hi
On linux you can use /proc/sys/net/ipv4/ip_nonlocal_bind to bind to non
local
address on start of FS and then you don't need any restart of FS or reload of sofia profile if this addres is active on the node
or you can have this floating address on dummy iface (?or lo ) and then use right settings in /proc/sys/net/ipv4/conf/eth?/arp_filter,arp_ignore and then FS can use this address to bind on start and you don't need restart of FS?or relaod of sofia profile ...
Kleo
On Thu, 8 Jul 2010, viewpoint wrote:
Hello.
I currently have a project where I'm researching how to establish a clustered platform wieth failover time ~= some milliseconds.
At present we have: 2 identical servers FS, wieth established Pacemaker (http://www.clusterlabs.org/wiki/Install#From_Source) - heartbeat. On the one hand it is possible to tell that all works, as, at refusal of the first server, the second server receives cluster-ip. A problem that FreeSWITCH it is necessary to restart (or simply to start) that it began to work with the new IP-address. As the result, a switching total time makes 10-20 sec which basic part is necessary on launch FreeSwitch.
any ideas?
Thanks.
-- klejch+freeswitch@netbox.cz <klejch%2Bfreeswitch@netbox.cz>
_______________________________________________ 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
Я в Моем Мире - http://my.mail.ru/list/yurazilot1/
_______________________________________________ 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
_______________________________________________ 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
-- Sincerely
Jay
_______________________________________________ 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
Wow Wow Wow! 2010/8/5 Steven Ayre <steveayre@gmail.com>
Cool!
On 4 August 2010 21:15, jay binks <jaybinks@gmail.com> wrote:
Guys, further to this interesting discussion, please check out this wiki page
http://wiki.freeswitch.org/wiki/Freeswitch_HA
there was an announcement at cluecon that improves Freeswitches ability to do HA-clustering. please can you update this wiki page with the information you have learned doing the pacemaker side of this.
also keep the conversation going now, with this new information :)
Jay
2010/7/12 Steven Ayre <steveayre@gmail.com>
"As server FS work with share db, there is an impression that at switching
Cluster-IP with active on a passive, passive server can pick up session begun on an active server (the necessary data about current sessions takes from the share db). Whether So it? Testing has shown that at switching Cluster-IP on reserve FS, that does not process session which have begun on first FS :("
Sorry, but that's not currently possible as the call state information is held in memory, not the shared database, and has execution threads started for processing the signalling/media which aren't duplicated on the other machine(s).
-Steve
2010/7/9 viewpoint <yurazilot1@list.ru>
Many thanks for fast and substantial answers!
Has established ipv4.ip_nonlocal_bind=1. Now there is no necessity to reboot FS or sofia profile.
As a result it has turned out: 1) Two servers FS which kernel works with the shared db through unix ODBC 2) It Is realised Cluster-IP by installations Pacemaker (http://www.clusterlabs.org/wiki/Install#From_Source)
As server FS work with share db, there is an impression that at switching Cluster-IP with active on a passive, passive server can pick up session begun on an active server (the necessary data about current sessions takes from the share db). Whether So it? Testing has shown that at switching Cluster-IP on reserve FS, that does not process session which have begun on first FS :(
Thu, 8 Jul 2010 16:21:40 +0200 (CEST) письмо от Vladimir Klejch < klejch+freeswitch@netbox.cz <klejch%2Bfreeswitch@netbox.cz>>:
Hi
On linux you can use /proc/sys/net/ipv4/ip_nonlocal_bind to bind to
non local
address on start of FS and then you don't need any restart of FS or reload of sofia profile if this addres is active on the node
or you can have this floating address on dummy iface (?or lo ) and then use right settings in /proc/sys/net/ipv4/conf/eth?/arp_filter,arp_ignore and then FS can use this address to bind on start and you don't need restart of FS?or relaod of sofia profile ...
Kleo
On Thu, 8 Jul 2010, viewpoint wrote:
Hello.
I currently have a project where I'm researching how to establish a clustered platform wieth failover time ~= some milliseconds.
At present we have: 2 identical servers FS, wieth established Pacemaker (http://www.clusterlabs.org/wiki/Install#From_Source) - heartbeat. On the one hand it is possible to tell that all works, as, at refusal of the first server, the second server receives cluster-ip. A problem that FreeSWITCH it is necessary to restart (or simply to start) that it began to work with the new IP-address. As the result, a switching total time makes 10-20 sec which basic part is necessary on launch FreeSwitch.
any ideas?
Thanks.
-- klejch+freeswitch@netbox.cz <klejch%2Bfreeswitch@netbox.cz>
_______________________________________________ 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
Я в Моем Мире - http://my.mail.ru/list/yurazilot1/
_______________________________________________ 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
_______________________________________________ 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
-- Sincerely
Jay
_______________________________________________ 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
_______________________________________________ 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
What if you have more then a switch on the cluster? How does the migration gets decided? I am confused on how this works. I guess I need to read the code... João Mesquita 2010/8/4 Nyamul Hassan <mnhassan@usa.net>
Wow Wow Wow!
2010/8/5 Steven Ayre <steveayre@gmail.com>
Cool!
On 4 August 2010 21:15, jay binks <jaybinks@gmail.com> wrote:
Guys, further to this interesting discussion, please check out this wiki page
http://wiki.freeswitch.org/wiki/Freeswitch_HA
there was an announcement at cluecon that improves Freeswitches ability to do HA-clustering. please can you update this wiki page with the information you have learned doing the pacemaker side of this.
also keep the conversation going now, with this new information :)
Jay
2010/7/12 Steven Ayre <steveayre@gmail.com>
"As server FS work with share db, there is an impression that at
switching Cluster-IP with active on a passive, passive server can pick up session begun on an active server (the necessary data about current sessions takes from the share db). Whether So it? Testing has shown that at switching Cluster-IP on reserve FS, that does not process session which have begun on first FS :("
Sorry, but that's not currently possible as the call state information is held in memory, not the shared database, and has execution threads started for processing the signalling/media which aren't duplicated on the other machine(s).
-Steve
2010/7/9 viewpoint <yurazilot1@list.ru>
Many thanks for fast and substantial answers!
Has established ipv4.ip_nonlocal_bind=1. Now there is no necessity to reboot FS or sofia profile.
As a result it has turned out: 1) Two servers FS which kernel works with the shared db through unix ODBC 2) It Is realised Cluster-IP by installations Pacemaker (http://www.clusterlabs.org/wiki/Install#From_Source)
As server FS work with share db, there is an impression that at switching Cluster-IP with active on a passive, passive server can pick up session begun on an active server (the necessary data about current sessions takes from the share db). Whether So it? Testing has shown that at switching Cluster-IP on reserve FS, that does not process session which have begun on first FS :(
Thu, 8 Jul 2010 16:21:40 +0200 (CEST) письмо от Vladimir Klejch < klejch+freeswitch@netbox.cz <klejch%2Bfreeswitch@netbox.cz>>:
Hi
On linux you can use /proc/sys/net/ipv4/ip_nonlocal_bind to bind to
non local
address on start of FS and then you don't need any restart of FS or reload of sofia profile if this addres is active on the node
or you can have this floating address on dummy iface (?or lo ) and then use right settings in /proc/sys/net/ipv4/conf/eth?/arp_filter,arp_ignore and then FS can use this address to bind on start and you don't need restart of FS?or relaod of sofia profile ...
Kleo
On Thu, 8 Jul 2010, viewpoint wrote:
> Hello. > > I currently have a project where I'm researching how to establish a > clustered platform wieth failover time ~= some milliseconds. > > At present we have: 2 identical servers FS, wieth established Pacemaker > (http://www.clusterlabs.org/wiki/Install#From_Source) - heartbeat. On > the one hand it is possible to tell that all works, as, at refusal of > the first server, the second server receives cluster-ip. A problem that > FreeSWITCH it is necessary to restart (or simply to start) that it began > to work with the new IP-address. As the result, a switching total time > makes 10-20 sec which basic part is necessary on launch FreeSwitch. > > any ideas? > > Thanks.
-- klejch+freeswitch@netbox.cz <klejch%2Bfreeswitch@netbox.cz>
_______________________________________________ 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
Я в Моем Мире - http://my.mail.ru/list/yurazilot1/
_______________________________________________ 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
_______________________________________________ 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
-- Sincerely
Jay
_______________________________________________ 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
_______________________________________________ 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
_______________________________________________ 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
I think it's only for failover, not clone ----- Original Message ----- From: João Mesquita To: FreeSWITCH Users Help Sent: Wednesday, August 04, 2010 8:49 PM Subject: Re: [Freeswitch-users] FS HA-cluster What if you have more then a switch on the cluster? How does the migration gets decided? I am confused on how this works. I guess I need to read the code... João Mesquita 2010/8/4 Nyamul Hassan <mnhassan@usa.net> Wow Wow Wow! 2010/8/5 Steven Ayre <steveayre@gmail.com> Cool! On 4 August 2010 21:15, jay binks <jaybinks@gmail.com> wrote: Guys, further to this interesting discussion, please check out this wiki page http://wiki.freeswitch.org/wiki/Freeswitch_HA there was an announcement at cluecon that improves Freeswitches ability to do HA-clustering. please can you update this wiki page with the information you have learned doing the pacemaker side of this. also keep the conversation going now, with this new information :) Jay 2010/7/12 Steven Ayre <steveayre@gmail.com> "As server FS work with share db, there is an impression that at switching Cluster-IP with active on a passive, passive server can pick up session begun on an active server (the necessary data about current sessions takes from the share db). Whether So it? Testing has shown that at switching Cluster-IP on reserve FS, that does not process session which have begun on first FS :(" Sorry, but that's not currently possible as the call state information is held in memory, not the shared database, and has execution threads started for processing the signalling/media which aren't duplicated on the other machine(s). -Steve 2010/7/9 viewpoint <yurazilot1@list.ru> Many thanks for fast and substantial answers! Has established ipv4.ip_nonlocal_bind=1. Now there is no necessity to reboot FS or sofia profile. As a result it has turned out: 1) Two servers FS which kernel works with the shared db through unix ODBC 2) It Is realised Cluster-IP by installations Pacemaker (http://www.clusterlabs.org/wiki/Install#From_Source) As server FS work with share db, there is an impression that at switching Cluster-IP with active on a passive, passive server can pick up session begun on an active server (the necessary data about current sessions takes from the share db). Whether So it? Testing has shown that at switching Cluster-IP on reserve FS, that does not process session which have begun on first FS :( Thu, 8 Jul 2010 16:21:40 +0200 (CEST) письмо от Vladimir Klejch <klejch+freeswitch@netbox.cz>: > > Hi > > On linux you can use /proc/sys/net/ipv4/ip_nonlocal_bind to bind to non local > address on start of FS and then you don't need any restart of FS or > reload of sofia profile if this addres is active on the node > > or you can have this floating address on dummy iface (?or lo ) and then > use right settings in /proc/sys/net/ipv4/conf/eth?/arp_filter,arp_ignore > and then FS can use this address to bind on start and you don't need > restart of FS?or relaod of sofia profile ... > > > > Kleo > > On Thu, 8 Jul 2010, viewpoint wrote: > > > Hello. > > > > I currently have a project where I'm researching how to establish a > > clustered platform wieth failover time ~= some milliseconds. > > > > At present we have: 2 identical servers FS, wieth established Pacemaker > > (http://www.clusterlabs.org/wiki/Install#From_Source) - heartbeat. On > > the one hand it is possible to tell that all works, as, at refusal of > > the first server, the second server receives cluster-ip. A problem that > > FreeSWITCH it is necessary to restart (or simply to start) that it began > > to work with the new IP-address. As the result, a switching total time > > makes 10-20 sec which basic part is necessary on launch FreeSwitch. > > > > any ideas? > > > > Thanks. > > > -- > klejch+freeswitch@netbox.cz > > _______________________________________________ > 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 Я в Моем Мире - http://my.mail.ru/list/yurazilot1/ _______________________________________________ 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 _______________________________________________ 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 -- Sincerely Jay _______________________________________________ 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 _______________________________________________ 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 _______________________________________________ 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 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ _______________________________________________ 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
This is awesome Does the 1.0.6 version support the track call feature? <param name="track-calls" value="true"/> Henry Huang Unified Communication System R&D Project Manager US: +1 (626) 606-3306 Chat Skype: unicsolution MSN: b_ball_henry@hotmail.com Contact Me [image: Linkedin]<http://www.linkedin.com/pub/henry-huang/1/654/578>[image: Facebook] <http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=595148342>[image: Twitter]<http://twitter.com/unicsolution> On Thu, Aug 5, 2010 at 10:21 AM, Madovsky <infos@madovsky.org> wrote:
I think it's only for failover, not clone
----- Original Message ----- *From:* João Mesquita <jmesquita@freeswitch.org> *To:* FreeSWITCH Users Help <freeswitch-users@lists.freeswitch.org> *Sent:* Wednesday, August 04, 2010 8:49 PM *Subject:* Re: [Freeswitch-users] FS HA-cluster
What if you have more then a switch on the cluster?
How does the migration gets decided? I am confused on how this works. I guess I need to read the code...
João Mesquita
2010/8/4 Nyamul Hassan <mnhassan@usa.net>
Wow Wow Wow!
2010/8/5 Steven Ayre <steveayre@gmail.com>
Cool!
On 4 August 2010 21:15, jay binks <jaybinks@gmail.com> wrote:
Guys, further to this interesting discussion, please check out this wiki page
http://wiki.freeswitch.org/wiki/Freeswitch_HA
there was an announcement at cluecon that improves Freeswitches ability to do HA-clustering. please can you update this wiki page with the information you have learned doing the pacemaker side of this.
also keep the conversation going now, with this new information :)
Jay
2010/7/12 Steven Ayre <steveayre@gmail.com>
"As server FS work with share db, there is an impression that at
switching Cluster-IP with active on a passive, passive server can pick up session begun on an active server (the necessary data about current sessions takes from the share db). Whether So it? Testing has shown that at switching Cluster-IP on reserve FS, that does not process session which have begun on first FS :("
Sorry, but that's not currently possible as the call state information is held in memory, not the shared database, and has execution threads started for processing the signalling/media which aren't duplicated on the other machine(s).
-Steve
2010/7/9 viewpoint <yurazilot1@list.ru>
Many thanks for fast and substantial answers!
Has established ipv4.ip_nonlocal_bind=1. Now there is no necessity to reboot FS or sofia profile.
As a result it has turned out: 1) Two servers FS which kernel works with the shared db through unix ODBC 2) It Is realised Cluster-IP by installations Pacemaker (http://www.clusterlabs.org/wiki/Install#From_Source)
As server FS work with share db, there is an impression that at switching Cluster-IP with active on a passive, passive server can pick up session begun on an active server (the necessary data about current sessions takes from the share db). Whether So it? Testing has shown that at switching Cluster-IP on reserve FS, that does not process session which have begun on first FS :(
Thu, 8 Jul 2010 16:21:40 +0200 (CEST) письмо от Vladimir Klejch < klejch+freeswitch@netbox.cz <klejch%2Bfreeswitch@netbox.cz>>:
> > Hi > > On linux you can use /proc/sys/net/ipv4/ip_nonlocal_bind to bind to non local > address on start of FS and then you don't need any restart of FS or > reload of sofia profile if this addres is active on the node > > or you can have this floating address on dummy iface (?or lo ) and then > use right settings in /proc/sys/net/ipv4/conf/eth?/arp_filter,arp_ignore > and then FS can use this address to bind on start and you don't need > restart of FS?or relaod of sofia profile ... > > > > Kleo > > On Thu, 8 Jul 2010, viewpoint wrote: > > > Hello. > > > > I currently have a project where I'm researching how to establish a > > clustered platform wieth failover time ~= some milliseconds. > > > > At present we have: 2 identical servers FS, wieth established Pacemaker > > (http://www.clusterlabs.org/wiki/Install#From_Source) - heartbeat. On > > the one hand it is possible to tell that all works, as, at refusal of > > the first server, the second server receives cluster-ip. A problem that > > FreeSWITCH it is necessary to restart (or simply to start) that it began > > to work with the new IP-address. As the result, a switching total time > > makes 10-20 sec which basic part is necessary on launch FreeSwitch. > > > > any ideas? > > > > Thanks. > > > -- > klejch+freeswitch@netbox.cz <klejch%2Bfreeswitch@netbox.cz> > > _______________________________________________ > 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
Я в Моем Мире - http://my.mail.ru/list/yurazilot1/
_______________________________________________ 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
_______________________________________________ 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
-- Sincerely
Jay
_______________________________________________ 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
_______________________________________________ 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
_______________________________________________ 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
------------------------------
_______________________________________________ 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
_______________________________________________ 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
I think it's the last git ----- Original Message ----- From: Henry Huang To: FreeSWITCH Users Help Sent: Thursday, August 05, 2010 12:57 AM Subject: Re: [Freeswitch-users] FS HA-cluster This is awesome Does the 1.0.6 version support the track call feature? <param name="track-calls" value="true"/> Henry Huang Unified Communication System R&D Project Manager US: +1 (626) 606-3306 Chat Skype: unicsolution MSN: b_ball_henry@hotmail.com Contact Me On Thu, Aug 5, 2010 at 10:21 AM, Madovsky <infos@madovsky.org> wrote: I think it's only for failover, not clone ----- Original Message ----- From: João Mesquita To: FreeSWITCH Users Help Sent: Wednesday, August 04, 2010 8:49 PM Subject: Re: [Freeswitch-users] FS HA-cluster What if you have more then a switch on the cluster? How does the migration gets decided? I am confused on how this works. I guess I need to read the code... João Mesquita 2010/8/4 Nyamul Hassan <mnhassan@usa.net> Wow Wow Wow! 2010/8/5 Steven Ayre <steveayre@gmail.com> Cool! On 4 August 2010 21:15, jay binks <jaybinks@gmail.com> wrote: Guys, further to this interesting discussion, please check out this wiki page http://wiki.freeswitch.org/wiki/Freeswitch_HA there was an announcement at cluecon that improves Freeswitches ability to do HA-clustering. please can you update this wiki page with the information you have learned doing the pacemaker side of this. also keep the conversation going now, with this new information :) Jay 2010/7/12 Steven Ayre <steveayre@gmail.com> "As server FS work with share db, there is an impression that at switching Cluster-IP with active on a passive, passive server can pick up session begun on an active server (the necessary data about current sessions takes from the share db). Whether So it? Testing has shown that at switching Cluster-IP on reserve FS, that does not process session which have begun on first FS :(" Sorry, but that's not currently possible as the call state information is held in memory, not the shared database, and has execution threads started for processing the signalling/media which aren't duplicated on the other machine(s). -Steve 2010/7/9 viewpoint <yurazilot1@list.ru> Many thanks for fast and substantial answers! Has established ipv4.ip_nonlocal_bind=1. Now there is no necessity to reboot FS or sofia profile. As a result it has turned out: 1) Two servers FS which kernel works with the shared db through unix ODBC 2) It Is realised Cluster-IP by installations Pacemaker (http://www.clusterlabs.org/wiki/Install#From_Source) As server FS work with share db, there is an impression that at switching Cluster-IP with active on a passive, passive server can pick up session begun on an active server (the necessary data about current sessions takes from the share db). Whether So it? Testing has shown that at switching Cluster-IP on reserve FS, that does not process session which have begun on first FS :( Thu, 8 Jul 2010 16:21:40 +0200 (CEST) письмо от Vladimir Klejch <klejch+freeswitch@netbox.cz>: > > Hi > > On linux you can use /proc/sys/net/ipv4/ip_nonlocal_bind to bind to non local > address on start of FS and then you don't need any restart of FS or > reload of sofia profile if this addres is active on the node > > or you can have this floating address on dummy iface (?or lo ) and then > use right settings in /proc/sys/net/ipv4/conf/eth?/arp_filter,arp_ignore > and then FS can use this address to bind on start and you don't need > restart of FS?or relaod of sofia profile ... > > > > Kleo > > On Thu, 8 Jul 2010, viewpoint wrote: > > > Hello. > > > > I currently have a project where I'm researching how to establish a > > clustered platform wieth failover time ~= some milliseconds. > > > > At present we have: 2 identical servers FS, wieth established Pacemaker > > (http://www.clusterlabs.org/wiki/Install#From_Source) - heartbeat. On > > the one hand it is possible to tell that all works, as, at refusal of > > the first server, the second server receives cluster-ip. A problem that > > FreeSWITCH it is necessary to restart (or simply to start) that it began > > to work with the new IP-address. As the result, a switching total time > > makes 10-20 sec which basic part is necessary on launch FreeSwitch. > > > > any ideas? > > > > Thanks. > > > -- > klejch+freeswitch@netbox.cz > > _______________________________________________ > 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 Я в Моем Мире - http://my.mail.ru/list/yurazilot1/ _______________________________________________ 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 _______________________________________________ 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 -- Sincerely Jay _______________________________________________ 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 _______________________________________________ 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 _______________________________________________ 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 -------------------------------------------------------------------------- _______________________________________________ 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 _______________________________________________ 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 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ _______________________________________________ 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
Sure does support it... In fact its been hidden in the codebase for a while... :) Sent from my iPad On Aug 4, 2010, at 11:57 PM, Henry Huang <b_ball_henry@hotmail.com> wrote:
This is awesome
Does the 1.0.6 version support the track call feature?
<param name="track-calls" value="true"/>
Henry Huang Unified Communication System R&D Project Manager US: +1 (626) 606-3306 Chat Skype: unicsolution MSN: b_ball_henry@hotmail.com Contact Me
so when I use the core_ODBC function. Does those session information getting written to the database as well? If so , I can have several FS box maintain the same session base right? For example, I have a load balancer in front of FS 1, 2, and 3. FS 1, 2, and 3 all have the share the same core DB via core_ODBC. Then when one of the FS fails , the calls will be directed to one of the live FS server and continue the conversation? (All the FS shares the same virtual IP, this is a LVS implementation) Henry Huang Unified Communication System R&D Project Manager US: +1 (626) 606-3306 Chat Skype: unicsolution MSN: b_ball_henry@hotmail.com Contact Me [image: Linkedin]<http://www.linkedin.com/pub/henry-huang/1/654/578>[image: Facebook] <http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=595148342>[image: Twitter]<http://twitter.com/unicsolution> On Thu, Aug 5, 2010 at 1:20 PM, Jay Binks <jaybinks@gmail.com> wrote:
Sure does support it...
In fact its been hidden in the codebase for a while... :)
Sent from my iPad
On Aug 4, 2010, at 11:57 PM, Henry Huang <b_ball_henry@hotmail.com> wrote:
This is awesome
Does the 1.0.6 version support the track call feature?
<param name="track-calls" value="true"/>
Henry Huang Unified Communication System R&D Project Manager US: +1 (626) 606-3306 Chat Skype: unicsolution MSN: <b_ball_henry@hotmail.com> b_ball_henry@hotmail.com Contact Me [image: Linkedin]<http://www.linkedin.com/pub/henry-huang/1/654/578>[image: Facebook] <http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=595148342>[image: Twitter] <http://twitter.com/unicsolution>
_______________________________________________ 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
(All the FS shares the same virtual IP, this is a LVS implementation) do you use cluster IP ? ----- Original Message ----- From: Henry Huang To: FreeSWITCH Users Help Sent: Thursday, August 05, 2010 1:39 AM Subject: Re: [Freeswitch-users] FS HA-cluster
so when I use the core_ODBC function. Does those session information getting written to the database as well? If so , I can have several FS box maintain the same session base right? For example, I have a load balancer in front of FS 1, 2, and 3. FS 1, 2, and 3 all have the share the same core DB via core_ODBC. Then when one of the FS fails , the calls will be directed to one of the live FS server and continue the conversation? (All the FS shares the same virtual IP, this is a LVS implementation) Henry Huang Unified Communication System R&D Project Manager US: +1 (626) 606-3306 Chat Skype: unicsolution MSN: b_ball_henry@hotmail.com Contact Me On Thu, Aug 5, 2010 at 1:20 PM, Jay Binks <jaybinks@gmail.com> wrote: Sure does support it... In fact its been hidden in the codebase for a while... :) Sent from my iPad On Aug 4, 2010, at 11:57 PM, Henry Huang <b_ball_henry@hotmail.com> wrote: This is awesome Does the 1.0.6 version support the track call feature? <param name="track-calls" value="true"/> Henry Huang Unified Communication System R&D Project Manager US: +1 (626) 606-3306 Chat Skype: unicsolution MSN: b_ball_henry@hotmail.com Contact Me _______________________________________________ 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 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ _______________________________________________ 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
I am not sure of the term "cluster IP" but here is the example Load balancer have the actual public IP , while all FS servers has the same IP setup on the box as virtual IP and listens on the virtual IP. So in other words, all the FS servers are listening to the same IP address through out the architecture. Henry Huang Unified Communication System R&D Project Manager US: +1 (626) 606-3306 Chat Skype: unicsolution MSN: b_ball_henry@hotmail.com Contact Me [image: Linkedin]<http://www.linkedin.com/pub/henry-huang/1/654/578>[image: Facebook] <http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=595148342>[image: Twitter]<http://twitter.com/unicsolution>
If I guess how this works correctly it'll only handle failover, threads will still be needed in the FreeSWITCH architecture. I think call state is written to the database in realtime, then if FS fails a new instance of FS is started on another machine, reads call states from the database and starts threads for each call. Just a guess though. That'd mean it's read when FreeSWITCH starts up, so couldn't handle multiple servers on the same IP but would handle primary and backup servers. -Steve On 5 August 2010 07:23, Henry Huang <b_ball_henry@hotmail.com> wrote:
I am not sure of the term "cluster IP" but here is the example
Load balancer have the actual public IP , while all FS servers has the same IP setup on the box as virtual IP and listens on the virtual IP. So in other words, all the FS servers are listening to the same IP address through out the architecture.
Henry Huang Unified Communication System R&D Project Manager US: +1 (626) 606-3306 Chat Skype: unicsolution MSN: b_ball_henry@hotmail.com Contact Me [image: Linkedin]<http://www.linkedin.com/pub/henry-huang/1/654/578>[image: Facebook] <http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=595148342>[image: Twitter] <http://twitter.com/unicsolution>
_______________________________________________ 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
I will try this param tomorrow I have a cluster with ODBC and indie IPs.... ----- Original Message ----- From: Steven Ayre To: FreeSWITCH Users Help Sent: Thursday, August 05, 2010 3:40 AM Subject: Re: [Freeswitch-users] FS HA-cluster If I guess how this works correctly it'll only handle failover, threads will still be needed in the FreeSWITCH architecture. I think call state is written to the database in realtime, then if FS fails a new instance of FS is started on another machine, reads call states from the database and starts threads for each call. Just a guess though. That'd mean it's read when FreeSWITCH starts up, so couldn't handle multiple servers on the same IP but would handle primary and backup servers. -Steve On 5 August 2010 07:23, Henry Huang <b_ball_henry@hotmail.com> wrote: I am not sure of the term "cluster IP" but here is the example Load balancer have the actual public IP , while all FS servers has the same IP setup on the box as virtual IP and listens on the virtual IP. So in other words, all the FS servers are listening to the same IP address through out the architecture. Henry Huang Unified Communication System R&D Project Manager US: +1 (626) 606-3306 Chat Skype: unicsolution MSN: b_ball_henry@hotmail.com Contact Me _______________________________________________ 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 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ _______________________________________________ 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
Madovsky: I think the track feature only works under the same IP. Under HA mode, the FS server will be using the exact same IP addresses. That's why I said if I have all the FS servers listening on the same IP behind a LVS load balancer, I wonder if it works. Henry Huang Unified Communication System R&D Project Manager US: +1 (626) 606-3306 Chat Skype: unicsolution MSN: b_ball_henry@hotmail.com Contact Me [image: Linkedin]<http://www.linkedin.com/pub/henry-huang/1/654/578>[image: Facebook] <http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=595148342>[image: Twitter]<http://twitter.com/unicsolution> On Thu, Aug 5, 2010 at 3:54 PM, Madovsky <infos@madovsky.org> wrote:
I will try this param tomorrow I have a cluster with ODBC and indie IPs....
----- Original Message ----- *From:* Steven Ayre <steveayre@gmail.com> *To:* FreeSWITCH Users Help <freeswitch-users@lists.freeswitch.org> *Sent:* Thursday, August 05, 2010 3:40 AM *Subject:* Re: [Freeswitch-users] FS HA-cluster
If I guess how this works correctly it'll only handle failover, threads will still be needed in the FreeSWITCH architecture. I think call state is written to the database in realtime, then if FS fails a new instance of FS is started on another machine, reads call states from the database and starts threads for each call. Just a guess though. That'd mean it's read when FreeSWITCH starts up, so couldn't handle multiple servers on the same IP but would handle primary and backup servers.
-Steve
On 5 August 2010 07:23, Henry Huang <b_ball_henry@hotmail.com> wrote:
I am not sure of the term "cluster IP" but here is the example
Load balancer have the actual public IP , while all FS servers has the same IP setup on the box as virtual IP and listens on the virtual IP. So in other words, all the FS servers are listening to the same IP address through out the architecture.
Henry Huang Unified Communication System R&D Project Manager US: +1 (626) 606-3306 Chat Skype: unicsolution MSN: b_ball_henry@hotmail.com Contact Me [image: Linkedin]<http://www.linkedin.com/pub/henry-huang/1/654/578>[image: Facebook] <http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=595148342>[image: Twitter] <http://twitter.com/unicsolution>
_______________________________________________ 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
------------------------------
_______________________________________________ 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
_______________________________________________ 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
It might just work... why not try it. /b On Aug 5, 2010, at 6:34 AM, Henry Huang wrote:
Madovsky:
I think the track feature only works under the same IP. Under HA mode, the FS server will be using the exact same IP addresses. That's why I said if I have all the FS servers listening on the same IP behind a LVS load balancer, I wonder if it works.
participants (12)
-
Brian West
-
Giovanni Maruzzelli
-
Henry Huang
-
jay binks
-
Jay Binks
-
João Mesquita
-
Madovsky
-
Nyamul Hassan
-
Rupa Schomaker
-
Steven Ayre
-
viewpoint
-
Vladimir Klejch