[OpenSIPS-Users] Calls are not properly distributed using Load Balancer

Faisal Rehman faisal.rehman22 at yahoo.com
Thu Jan 5 13:59:16 CET 2012


Hi Sammy,

The mistake was very minor as in the load_balancer table I was giving group id as 1 to all the destination servers while in dispatcher table the group id was same for the three servers as 1 but different for the two servers as 0 & 2, so that was the reason there were no calls on these two servers & was fixed assigning the same group id as 1 to all the servers & the calls were distributed equally after the second load test :)

Ntop is I think for network monitoring & I installed it on one of my servers but don't know the exact mechanism of its monitoring for SIP especially. I am only dealing here with SIP yet so there isn't any built in tool or command in OpenSIPS for packet loss info.

 
Regards,


Faisal Rehman


________________________________
 From: Sammy Govind <govoiper at gmail.com>
To: Faisal Rehman <faisal.rehman22 at yahoo.com>; OpenSIPS users mailling list <users at lists.opensips.org> 
Sent: Thursday, January 5, 2012 5:29 PM
Subject: Re: [OpenSIPS-Users] Calls are not properly distributed using Load Balancer
 

Hi,


Really nice to see your issue is resolved, mind sharing the mistake you had in table !?

 About the packet loss, try using some traffic monitoring tool for this like ntop, or some snmp based interface monitoring utility to find packet loss. If you are talking about call Media packet losses then you can get the stats if you're using RTPproxy. Rtpproxy publishes media stats at the end of the call.

Regards,
Sammy.


On Thu, Jan 5, 2012 at 5:20 PM, Faisal Rehman <faisal.rehman22 at yahoo.com> wrote:

Hi Guys,
>
>
>The issue is fixed & it was due to my mistake because I was using some different values in the dispatcher table. By the way I have got one more question which is that how can I check the total packet loss in OpenSISP for the whole traffic?
>
>
> 
>Regards,
>
>
>Faisal Rehman
>
>
>________________________________
> From: Sammy Govind <govoiper at gmail.com>
>To: OpenSIPS users mailling list <users at lists.opensips.org> 
>Sent: Thursday, January 5, 2012 11:25 AM
>Subject: Re: [OpenSIPS-Users] Calls are not properly distributed using Load Balancer
>
>
>
>Hi Faisal,
>
>
>Please share the contents of load_balancer table. I doubt that the group defined (or as Vlad doubt resource assigned)for the servers are different thats why they are not receiving the traffic.
>
>
>
>Regards,
>Sammy.
>
>
>
>On Wed, Jan 4, 2012 at 4:18 PM, Vlad Paiu <vladpaiu at opensips.org> wrote:
>
> 
>>Hello,
>>
>>If using the load_balancer module, do the two servers that get no
    traffic at all have the same assigned resources as the other 3
    server that get even distribution of calls ?
>>
>>Regards,
>>
>>Vlad Paiu
OpenSIPS Developer
>>
>>On 01/04/2012 11:18 AM, Faisal Rehman wrote: 
>>Hi Guys,
>>>
>>>
>>>I was testing my OpenSIPS loadbalancer in live production environment where I was having 5 destination servers which should be getting equal calls load but I was surprised to see that there were two servers where there was no call but rest of the three servers were having equal traffic, so what can be the possible reasons for that issue?
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> 
>>>Regards,
>>>
>>>
>>>Faisal Rehman
>>>
_______________________________________________
Users mailing list Users at lists.opensips.org http://lists.opensips.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users 
>>_______________________________________________
>>Users mailing list
>>Users at lists.opensips.org
>>http://lists.opensips.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users
>>
>>
>
>_______________________________________________
>Users mailing list
>Users at lists.opensips.org
>http://lists.opensips.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users
>
>
>
>_______________________________________________
>Users mailing list
>Users at lists.opensips.org
>http://lists.opensips.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.opensips.org/pipermail/users/attachments/20120105/3cc6f9de/attachment-0001.htm>


More information about the Users mailing list