even if it is not an economically sensible then It will be pretty
situations to learn how to configure Kamailio and RTPProxy ;)
2017-03-14 7:56 GMT+01:00 Alex Balashov :
> An ambitious endeavour. Are you sure it's an economically sensible one,
> given that there are a variety of solutions already
An ambitious endeavour. Are you sure it's an economically sensible one, given
that there are a variety of solutions already out there?
On March 14, 2017 2:55:31 AM EDT, przeqpiciel wrote:
>I would like to create PBX platform, at now I faced to make drag&drop
>ivr
>creator. After that I would cr
I would like to create PBX platform, at now I faced to make drag&drop ivr
creator. After that I would create option for record calls for client and
this is why I look for solution :)
2017-03-14 7:47 GMT+01:00 Alex Balashov :
> Yes, though of course you would have to correlate the calls (most like
Yes, though of course you would have to correlate the calls (most likely by
Call-ID) and integrate all this.
On March 14, 2017 2:46:27 AM EDT, przeqpiciel wrote:
>So, I can use Kamailio as SBC/Load balancer/registrar, Asterisk as IVR
>and
>application server, and rtpproxy as media relay and re
So, I can use Kamailio as SBC/Load balancer/registrar, Asterisk as IVR and
application server, and rtpproxy as media relay and recorder ?
2017-03-14 7:44 GMT+01:00 Alex Balashov :
> It can record, as can a number of other media relays.
>
> On March 14, 2017 2:43:15 AM EDT, przeqpiciel
> wrote:
>
It can record, as can a number of other media relays.
On March 14, 2017 2:43:15 AM EDT, przeqpiciel wrote:
>>> WHy not installing rtpproxy and proxying all
>Because I would like to record some calls and I dont know RTPProxy's
>features, maybe it could record ?
>
>2017-03-14 5:14 GMT+01:00 anfeco
>> WHy not installing rtpproxy and proxying all
Because I would like to record some calls and I dont know RTPProxy's
features, maybe it could record ?
2017-03-14 5:14 GMT+01:00 anfecora :
> WHy not installing rtpproxy and proxying all rtp to the inside uase
> kamailio to load balance them, it wil
WHy not installing rtpproxy and proxying all rtp to the inside uase
kamailio to load balance them, it will be transparent on the inside perhaps
a cleaner solution?
On Mon, Mar 13, 2017 at 3:21 PM, Kjeld Flarup wrote:
> As I recall it is sequential, but not from the start everytime, it is
> incre
As I recall it is sequential, but not from the start everytime, it is
incrementing all the time.
If You are running three servers, then with a 100% identical load, one
would expect an average of 2 failing attempts per call.
The reality I see is however often very different RTP ports, most lik
Well, indeed, but a sequential scan of many consecutive ports like this from
the bottom of the same range can be quite a latent operation. So at the very
least the allocation strategy would benefit from being random. Does Asterisk
take that approach?
On March 13, 2017 6:04:06 PM EDT, Kjeld Fla
No there is no such thing as magic.
The most obvious way to implement the RTP port handling, is to first
open the next UDP port in the OS, and then report that back in the
Invite/200Ok. If the port cannot be opened, then simply try the next in
line.
Med venlig hilsen / Best regards
Kjeld Fl
Maybe there is an magic device? I know that if we have an asterisk, that
become to us with default configuration of rtp ports sets to 1_2.
And each call choose the one port fron that range. So if we have several
asterisks with default configuratiin of rtp, there is possibilities to have
2 c
On Mon, Mar 13, 2017 at 07:08:09AM +0100, Kjeld Flarup wrote:
> We run multiple Asterisk instances since 1.4 and never configured RTP ports.
>
> More challenging issues are the Asterisk DB, and the Asteisk home.
You may not have enough calls for RTP port collisions to become an
issue. Otherwise,
We run multiple Asterisk instances since 1.4 and never configured RTP
ports.
More challenging issues are the Asterisk DB, and the Asteisk home.
Med venlig hilsen / Best regards
Kjeld Flarup (Christensen) M.Sc E.E, Teknisk chef
Viptel ApS, Hammershusvej 16C, DK-7400 Herning
Telefon: +45 46949949
We face similar issues, we had 1 * server per VLAN, where each * had the
same IP address, we achieve this with NAT.
<> Asterisk 1
<> Asterisk 2
SIP LB <---> NAT <> Asterisk 3
Your NAT device needs to be SIP aware, in our case w
On Sun, Mar 12, 2017 at 10:48:37PM +0100, przeqpiciel wrote:
> Thank you for your respond. Obviously, I could set a port range per
> instance of Asterisk but I though about something more dynamic. But when I
> think on it more deep there is no any other solution.
Trying to run concurrent instance
HI,
Thank you for your respond. Obviously, I could set a port range per
instance of Asterisk but I though about something more dynamic. But when I
think on it more deep there is no any other solution.
2017-03-12 21:08 GMT+01:00 Brandon Armstead :
> Not entirely sure but you may be able to range
Not entirely sure but you may be able to range them 0-0 for dynamic
allocation and let the kernel handle it.
On Sun, Mar 12, 2017 at 12:56 PM Alex Balashov
wrote:
> Can you not assign different Asterisk instances different ranges of RTP
> ports to allocate from?
>
> On March 12, 2017 3:47:22 PM
Can you not assign different Asterisk instances different ranges of RTP ports
to allocate from?
On March 12, 2017 3:47:22 PM EDT, przeqpiciel wrote:
>I would like to ask you how you deal with several asterisks and
>kamailio on
>that same IP address, I have installation where i route 5060 to
>i
19 matches
Mail list logo
