1. Brekeke Product Name and Version: 3.8.5.2/493-3
2. Java version: 10.0.1
3. OS type and the version: Linux CentOS 7.5.1804 (Core)
4. UA (phone), gateway or other hardware/software involved: Asterisk
5. Your problem:
Set up two servers (primary and secondary) with Mirroring and heartbeats between them. Each has their own IP and then the Primary also has the virtual IP in place on it. What is happening, and is unexpected, is that SIP traffic (Active Sessions) are happening on both the Primary server and the Secondary server.
Is this a function of the Mirroring? Is Load Balancing actually happening here when it's not intended?
Question on potentially unintentional load balancing
Moderator: Brekeke Support Team
> SIP traffic (Active Sessions) are happening on both the Primary server and the Secondary server.
This is because Primary Server's traffic are mirrored to the Secondary Server.
The Secondary server handles them virtually so the Secondary Server itself doesn't forwards these traffics until the Primary Server goes down.
This is because Primary Server's traffic are mirrored to the Secondary Server.
The Secondary server handles them virtually so the Secondary Server itself doesn't forwards these traffics until the Primary Server goes down.
-
dudley.aoi
- Posts: 31
- Joined: Wed Oct 17, 2018 2:21 pm
RE: Question on potentially unintentional load balancing
@janp - Should the sessions on the primary be found in the active sessions list of the secondary, and vice-versa then?
For example, if we pick a random ongoing session from the active sessions list on the primary, would you expect to find a session with the same source and destination on the active sessions list on the secondary? Obviously this assumes that the session would be active and ongoing for the duration of said testing/verification.
For example, if we pick a random ongoing session from the active sessions list on the primary, would you expect to find a session with the same source and destination on the active sessions list on the secondary? Obviously this assumes that the session would be active and ongoing for the duration of said testing/verification.
> Should the sessions on the primary be found in the active sessions list of the secondary,
Yes.
> and vice-versa then?
No. Because the Secondary doesn't mirror packets to the Primary.
> would you expect to find a session with the same source and destination on the active sessions list on the secondary?
Yes
Yes.
> and vice-versa then?
No. Because the Secondary doesn't mirror packets to the Primary.
> would you expect to find a session with the same source and destination on the active sessions list on the secondary?
Yes
Assigning a SID (Session ID) is different at each SIP Server.
Also, depends on how call was ended (rejected or canceled), the Secondary Server keeps status of such ended sessions for a while even if the Primary Server doesn't show them at the Session List (technically Primary Server keep such status but doesn't show them in the list.)
So Session Lists look different between Primary and Secondary.
Also, depends on how call was ended (rejected or canceled), the Secondary Server keeps status of such ended sessions for a while even if the Primary Server doesn't show them at the Session List (technically Primary Server keep such status but doesn't show them in the list.)
So Session Lists look different between Primary and Secondary.