On Fri, Nov 6, 2009 at 4:42 PM, RJ Auburn <rj at voxeo.com> wrote:
I have seen F5's really mess up SIP signaling on a few deployments. They have some basic SIP features but if the NAT stuff gets complex they were not always rewriting all the headers. When pressed it seemed like their support had only done a few SIP deployments and it was pretty limited.
Good to know. It's not why we purchased them, but figured I would give it a shot. You could probably overcome most of that with custom irules, but who wants to spend weeks coding that... Linux-HA won't give you stateful failover, that you seem to have to pay through the nose for. If you can deal with the possibility of a few second outage, and ongoing calls dropping, then it is a viable option. We use Linux based cluster services to a large extent because it is cheap, and the liability is low for us. It all depends on the SLA and how much you want to spend. -Jonathan
On Nov 6, 2009, at 5:42 PM, Jonathan Thurman wrote:
On Fri, Nov 6, 2009 at 2:58 PM, anorexicpoodle <anorexicpoodle at gmail.com> wrote:
I have pretty much ruled out OpenSER/OpenSIPS/Kamilio because it isn't stateful in HA failover. Passing it through an Acme is ridiculously costly for the need i have, and most hardware based load balancers I am finding just aren't sip-aware, so I don't see them doing much better than OpenSER in a fail-over scenario, it would just be a different kind of ugliness.
F5s are SIP aware, but also expensive. ?We just got some LTM 1600s, but I haven't configured them for SIP yet. ?Everything else I have used them for they have been rock solid, so I am optimistic.
-Jonathan _______________________________________________ VoiceOps mailing list VoiceOps at voiceops.org https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/voiceops