On 7/20/2011 1:15 AM, AMANI M. BIN SUWAIF wrote:
Hi,
The problem is that fail-over between A records is not standard and
might/might not work with various SIP clients. On the other hand SRV
in my opinion has been designed with that in mind, that's why the
additional complexity with 2 SRV r
Hi,
The problem is that fail-over between A records is not standard and
might/might not work with various SIP clients. On the other hand SRV in
my opinion has been designed with that in mind, that's why the
additional complexity with 2 SRV records.
Thanks & Regards,
*Amani*
On 7/20/2011
On 7/18/2011 11:42 PM, AMANI MOHAMED BIN SUWAIF wrote:
Hi,
I have the below scenario
_TCP.EXAMPLE.COMIN SRV1005060primary-sbg.example.com
_TCP.EXAMPLE.COMIN SRV2005060
secondary-sbg.example.com
I have 2 IP ranges and 2 SBGs host, my intention is
for cl
Hi,
I have the below scenario
_TCP.EXAMPLE.COMIN SRV1005060primary-sbg.example.com
_TCP.EXAMPLE.COMIN SRV2005060secondary-sbg.example.com
I have 2 IP ranges and 2 SBGs host, my intention is
for client in IP range1
primary-sbg INA1.1.1.1
seco
4 matches
Mail list logo