[Freeswitch-users] Virtualized FreeSWITCH

Rob Forman rob4manhere at gmail.com
Wed Mar 3 09:47:35 PST 2010


Hi Chris,

Thanks for sharing what you're doing.  That's very helpful.  Which AMI  
did you deploy from?  I'm wondering what your ec2 kernel timer is set  
to.

Thanks!
Rob

On Mar 3, 2010, at 11:17 AM, Chris Fowler wrote:

> Hi Rob,
>
> We run FreeSWITCH on AWS' EC2.  A medium EC2 instance is happily  
> supporting 100 Polycom users, conference bridges etc.  Been running  
> for over a year.  We also use FlowRoute as our PSTN->SIP Interface,  
> and also Skype Business SIP.  Our users are scattered across the  
> globe - so having the box sitting on AWS' network infrastructure is  
> key to avoiding issues with latency, jitter, packet loss (i.e. I  
> don't think we could afford the connectivity AWS gives us if we had  
> to provision this in-house).
>
> There were no special tricks; you do need to modify/override the  
> following with the box's Elastic IP (EIP).
>
> modify conf/vars.xml and update
>  <X-PRE-PROCESS cmd="set" data="domain=<YOUR DOMAIN HERE>"/>
>
>  <X-PRE-PROCESS cmd="set" data="default_provider=sip.flowroute.com"/>
>  <X-PRE-PROCESS cmd="set" data="default_provider_username=<USER>"/>
>  <X-PRE-PROCESS cmd="set" data="default_provider_password=<PASS>"/>
>  <X-PRE-PROCESS cmd="set"  
> data="default_provider_from_domain=flowroute.com"/>
>  <X-PRE-PROCESS cmd="set" data="default_provider_register=true"/>
>
>  <X-PRE-PROCESS cmd="set" data="bind_server_ip=<AWS EIP>"/>
>  <X-PRE-PROCESS cmd="set" data="external_rtp_ip=<AWS EIP>"/>
>  <X-PRE-PROCESS cmd="set" data="external_sip_ip=<AWS EIP>"/>
>
>  <X-PRE-PROCESS cmd="set" data="outbound_caller_name=<YOUR NAME>"/>
>  <X-PRE-PROCESS cmd="set" data="outbound_caller_id=<YOUR CID>"/>
>
> conf/sip_profiles/internal.xml
> <param name="aggressive-nat-detection" value="true"/>
> <param name="multiple-registrations" value="true"/>
> <param name="ext-rtp-ip" value="$${external_rtp_ip}"/>
> <param name="ext-sip-ip" value="$${external_sip_ip}"/>
> <param name="NDLB-received-in-nat-reg-contact" value="true"/>
> <param name="NDLB-force-rport" value="true"/>
> <param name="NDLB-broken-auth-hash" value="true"/>
> <param name="enable-timer" value="false"/>
>
> conf/sip_profiles/external.xml
> <param name="aggressive-nat-detection" value="true"/>
> <param name="ext-rtp-ip" value="$${external_rtp_ip}"/>
> <param name="ext-sip-ip" value="$${external_sip_ip}"/>
> <param name="NDLB-force-rport" value="true"/>
>
> conf/autoload/switch.conf.xml
>    <param name="rtp-start-port" value="16384"/>
>    <param name="rtp-end-port" value="32768"/>
>
>
> Cheers, Chris.
> --
> RightScale, Inc.
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: freeswitch-users-bounces at lists.freeswitch.org [mailto:freeswitch-users-bounces at lists.freeswitch.org 
> ] On Behalf Of Rob Forman
> Sent: Tuesday, March 02, 2010 9:05 PM
> To: freeswitch-users at lists.freeswitch.org
> Subject: [Freeswitch-users] Virtualized FreeSWITCH
>
> Hi all,
>
> Is anyone running FreeSWITCH virtualized (xen or vmware) in
> production?  I saw ec2 and xen mentioned a few places.  If so, are
> there tips or tricks for handle timer issues which affect virtual
> machines in general, such as recommended divider or clocksource
> settings?  I'm seeing funny timing issues while testing with audio
> recording and playback that speed up or slow down.
>
> I have tried both paravirt and hvm.  The default xen kernel has a
> timer of 250, so I tried to hvm instead using the stock 5.3 kernel
> with the 1khz timer but didn't see much improvement.
>
> All of this was tested on 64-bit CentOS 5.3.
> - Physical host: Linux localhost.localdomain 2.6.18-164.11.1.el5xen #1
> SMP Wed Jan 20 08:06:04 EST 2010 x86_64 x86_64 x86_64 GNU/Linux
>   CONFIG_HZ=250
> - Paravirt host: Linux localhost.localdomain 2.6.18-128.el5xen #1 SMP
> Wed Jan 21 11:12:42 EST 2009 x86_64 x86_64 x86_64 GNU/Linux
>   CONFIG_HZ=250
> - Hvm host: Linux localhost.localdomain 2.6.18-128.el5 #1 SMP Wed Jan
> 21 10:41:14 EST 2009 x86_64 x86_64 x86_64 GNU/Linux
>   CONFIG_HZ=1000
>
>
> I'm sure physical hosts are the de-facto best practice, but are
> virtual machines not worth it at all?
>
> Cheers,
> Rob
>
> _______________________________________________
> FreeSWITCH-users mailing list
> FreeSWITCH-users at 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 at lists.freeswitch.org
> http://lists.freeswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/freeswitch-users
> UNSUBSCRIBE:http://lists.freeswitch.org/mailman/options/freeswitch-users
> http://www.freeswitch.org





More information about the FreeSWITCH-users mailing list