[OpenSIPS-Users] Dispatcher state exchange in an anycast clusterer
Bogdan-Andrei Iancu
bogdan at opensips.org
Mon Jun 12 07:30:46 UTC 2023
Hi Denys,
1) yes
2) you can use the same sharing tag for multiple modules, as time as
from logical perspective, the switching of the tags fits all the cases.
For dialogs, you may need one tag per node (to remember which node
created the dialog), so you may not be able to reuse here.
Regards,
Bogdan-Andrei Iancu
OpenSIPS Founder and Developer
https://www.opensips-solutions.com
https://www.siphub.com
On 6/9/23 1:30 PM, Denys Pozniak wrote:
> Hello!
> Thank you! The mechanism with a single tag for the dispatcher works as
> it should.
>
> But I still have a number of questions on related topics:
> 1) Should I declare this common dispatcher tag in the parameters of
> the clusterer module?
> Then, after the start, the tag on the active node will be set by an
> external script.
>
> modparam("clusterer", "sharing_tag", "dispatcher/1=backup")
> modparam("dispatcher", "cluster_sharing_tag", "dispatcher")
>
> 2) I also want to replicate transactions and dialogs, so should I
> declare own tags for each cluster node?
> Or like with a dispatcher do I need one common?
>
> modparam("clusterer", "sharing_tag", "anycast1/1=active")
> modparam("clusterer", "sharing_tag", "anycast2/1=backup")
> modparam("clusterer", "sharing_tag", "anycast3/1=backup")
> modparam("clusterer", "sharing_tag", "anycast4/1=backup")
> modparam("dialog", "dialog_replication_cluster", 1)
> modparam("tm", "tm_replication_cluster", 1)
> modparam("dispatcher", "cluster_sharing_tag", "dispatcher")
>
> вт, 6 июн. 2023 г. в 18:08, Bogdan-Andrei Iancu <bogdan at opensips.org
> <mailto:bogdan at opensips.org>>:
>
> Hi Denys,
>
> Even better if you have only one active opensips instance - in
> this case you can use only one sharing-tag across all
> nodes/servers in the dispatcher cluster, tag to point to the
> active instance. So, whenever you point the traffic to a certain
> opensips instance, be sure to make the tag active on that instance
> too.
> https://opensips.org/html/docs/modules/3.2.x/clusterer.html#mi_clusterer_shtag_set_active
> <https://opensips.org/html/docs/modules/3.2.x/clusterer.html#mi_clusterer_shtag_set_active>
>
> Best regards,
>
> Bogdan-Andrei Iancu
>
> OpenSIPS Founder and Developer
> https://www.opensips-solutions.com <https://www.opensips-solutions.com>
> https://www.siphub.com <https://www.siphub.com>
>
> On 6/6/23 4:11 PM, Denys Pozniak wrote:
>> Hello!
>>
>> >So, in the dispatcher cluster you have some active nodes, but
>> also some stand-by, right ?
>> All cluster nodes have the same dynamic routing protocol metric,
>> so only one random node can receive traffic from the network
>> point of view.
>> Well, accordingly, only the "active" node can accept replays to
>> SIP OPTIONS from the dispatcher. And all other nodes see the
>> dispatcher peers as not alive.
>> It's more a question of how to make other nodes believe the
>> status from the "active" node and not influence it.
>>
>> >And I see you did not set the this cluster_sharing_tag modparam
>> I have this option set, you probably didn't notice in the initial
>> thread.
>> modparam("dispatcher", "cluster_sharing_tag", "anycast1")
>>
>>
>> вт, 6 июн. 2023 г. в 11:37, Bogdan-Andrei Iancu
>> <bogdan at opensips.org <mailto:bogdan at opensips.org>>:
>>
>> Hi Denys,
>>
>> So, in the dispatcher cluster you have some active nodes, but
>> also some stand-by, right ?
>>
>> And I see you did not set the this cluster_sharing_tag
>> modparam [1] - check it out, it may help you in deciding
>> which nodes may broadcast the state inside the cluster (for
>> dispatcher)
>>
>> [1]
>> https://opensips.org/html/docs/modules/3.3.x/dispatcher.html#param_cluster_sharing_tag
>> <https://opensips.org/html/docs/modules/3.3.x/dispatcher.html#param_cluster_sharing_tag>
>>
>> Regards,
>>
>> Bogdan-Andrei Iancu
>>
>> OpenSIPS Founder and Developer
>> https://www.opensips-solutions.com <https://www.opensips-solutions.com>
>> https://www.siphub.com <https://www.siphub.com>
>>
>> On 6/2/23 5:39 PM, Denys Pozniak wrote:
>>> Hello!
>>>
>>> I need advice on how best to implement the anycast +
>>> clusterer + dispatcher scheme.
>>> In short, we want to build an additional upper layer in
>>> front of our sip legacy servers, on which traffic balancing
>>> will take place.
>>> Most likely it will look like several nodes of the same
>>> clusterer with a single public anycast address, from which
>>> traffic will also go to the public interfaces of the legacy
>>> sip servers (via the dispatcher list).
>>> During testing, it turned out that if we include the
>>> dispatcher module in the clusterer, then the inactive nodes
>>> of the cluster begin to affect the general state of the
>>> legacy sip servers on active node, since replays to SIP
>>> OPTIONS reach only one active node, though all nodes ping.
>>>
>>> Thus, the sip server status is constantly flapping on active
>>> node.
>>> Is it possible to somehow make all other nodes believe the
>>> active node at a given time and inherit its dispatcher state?
>>>
>>> *node1:*
>>> modparam("clusterer", "sharing_tag", "anycast1/1=active")
>>> modparam("clusterer", "sharing_tag", "anycast2/1=backup")
>>> modparam("clusterer", "sharing_tag", "anycast3/1=backup")
>>> modparam("clusterer", "sharing_tag", "anycast4/1=backup")
>>>
>>> modparam("dispatcher", "cluster_sharing_tag", "anycast1")
>>>
>>> modparam("dispatcher", "db_url", "text:///etc/opensips/dbtext")
>>> modparam("dispatcher", "attrs_avp", "$avp(dsp_attrs_avp)")
>>> modparam("dispatcher", "script_attrs_avp",
>>> "$avp(dsp_script_attrs_avp)")
>>> modparam("dispatcher", "hash_pvar", "$avp(dsp_hash_pvar)")
>>> modparam("dispatcher", "ds_ping_method", "OPTIONS")
>>> modparam("dispatcher", "ds_ping_from", "sip:ping at dispatcher")
>>> modparam("dispatcher", "ds_ping_interval", 10)
>>> modparam("dispatcher", "ds_probing_threshold", 2)
>>> modparam("dispatcher", "ds_probing_mode", 1)
>>> modparam("dispatcher", "options_reply_codes",
>>> "501,403,404,400,200")
>>> modparam("dispatcher", "dst_avp", "$avp(dsp_dst_avp)")
>>> modparam("dispatcher", "grp_avp", "$avp(dsp_grp_avp)")
>>> modparam("dispatcher", "cnt_avp", "$avp(dsp_cnt_avp)")
>>> modparam("dispatcher", "persistent_state", 1)
>>> modparam("dispatcher", "cluster_id", 1)
>>> modparam("dispatcher", "cluster_probing_mode", "by-shtag")
>>>
>>> *dispatcher:*
>>> id(int,auto) setid(int) destination(string)
>>> socket(string,null) state(int) probe_mode(int)
>>> weight(string) priority(int) attrs(string) description(string)
>>> 0:1:sip\:1.1.1.1\:5060;transport=udp::2:1:1:1:'':''
>>> 1:1:sip\:2.2.2.2\:5060;transport=udp::2:1:1:1:'':''
>>> 2:1:sip\:3.3.3.3\:5060;transport=udp::2:1:1:1:'':''
>>>
>>> Sure, it is possible to attach an additional public address
>>> to each node and do not share dispatcher state, but still I
>>> would like to somehow find a solution for the current scheme
>>>
>>> --
>>>
>>> BR,
>>> Denys Pozniak
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Users mailing list
>>> Users at lists.opensips.org <mailto:Users at lists.opensips.org>
>>> http://lists.opensips.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users <http://lists.opensips.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>>
>> BR,
>> Denys Pozniak
>>
>>
>
>
>
> --
>
> BR,
> Denys Pozniak
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.opensips.org/pipermail/users/attachments/20230612/7bada28a/attachment-0001.html>
More information about the Users
mailing list