Hello,
On 27/10/15 12:17, Sebastian Damm wrote:
> Hi,
>
> when inspecting dmq a bit further, I found that in fact there is an
> autodiscovery built in. When I told registrar 1 and registrar 2 to
> send to receiver, and told receiver to only send to itself, everything
> worked. Until the receiver w
Hi,
when inspecting dmq a bit further, I found that in fact there is an
autodiscovery built in. When I told registrar 1 and registrar 2 to send to
receiver, and told receiver to only send to itself, everything worked.
Until the receiver went offline. Then it got disabled by the registrars and
no p
Hello,
not that familiar with the dmq code to assert something by hart, but you
can always prevent any incident by capturing the SIP packet inside
config file and reply from there instead of handling it with dmq module
(if(method==...) ).
Cheers,
Daniel
On 21/10/15 09:49, Sebastian Damm wrote:
>
Hi,
I did see that REGISTERs received via DMQ are not replicated. What I was
wondering is, whether registrar 1 at some point discovers registrar 2
through the DMQ pings, and then "automagically" starts replicating its
packets to registrar 2, too.
Best Regards,
Sebastian
On Tue, Oct 20, 2015 at 5
Hello,
iirc, if one node doesn't handle a SIP register itself, should not
publish to other nodes anything. Is this what you are looking for -- one
node not to send to the others?
Cheers,
Daniel
On 20/10/15 17:24, Sebastian Damm wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I evaluated the dmq_usrloc module, and it works pre
Hi,
I evaluated the dmq_usrloc module, and it works pretty good if there are
two identical machines which replicate their location with each other. But
what I actually want to do is to send registrations to an extra machine
which is just there for writing the location into a central DB (in one
tab
