To follow up, separately deployed WebSocket proxies and registrars (sharing usrloc DB w/ db_mode 3) are working nicely now. Perhaps I can optimise the shared location data further, but that's a good enough start for me :) Thanks for the input from everyone.
On 15 October 2014 11:47, Frank Carmickle <fr...@carmickle.com> wrote: > > On Oct 15, 2014, at 10:40 AM, Ben Langfeld <b...@langfeld.me> wrote: > > On 15 October 2014 11:32, Juha Heinanen <j...@tutpro.com> wrote: > >> Ben Langfeld writes: >> >> > I figure at this point it may be simpler to separate the registrar and >> the >> > proxy rather than attempt to debug this further, though if you have any >> > other suggestions to avoid that I'd love to hear them. >> >> one possibility is that both of your combined proxy/registrars have >> their own location tables and you forward registrations from one to the >> other. >> > > The problem with that is horizontal scalability brings noise. If I have 10 > of these things, the SIP replication alone would be flooding the network. > > > If you are running in an environment where you can use multicast it might > be an option for you. Multicast the registrations from the edge proxy to > the registrar cluster. If not maybe you can get the registrars to > replicate to each other on a separate interface from the interface facing > the edge proxy. > > > --FC > > > > _______________________________________________ > SIP Express Router (SER) and Kamailio (OpenSER) - sr-users mailing list > sr-users@lists.sip-router.org > http://lists.sip-router.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sr-users > >
_______________________________________________ SIP Express Router (SER) and Kamailio (OpenSER) - sr-users mailing list sr-users@lists.sip-router.org http://lists.sip-router.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sr-users
