[OpenSIPS-Users] drouting enhancement clarifications

[Bogdan-Andrei Iancu]

Hi Brett,

I made a fix to "recover" this lost functionality of the DR module - to 
be able to select only on gw from a carrier / set (former alg 2).
See:
     http://opensips.svn.sourceforge.net/opensips/?rev=8940&view=rev

When defining the carriers, you just need to set flag 0x02 to tell that 
only the first selected available GW is to be used.

Regards,
Bogdan

On 04/02/2012 07:51 PM, Brett Nemeroff wrote:
> Bogdan,
>
> So the typical requirement I see is that I'll put in a handful of 
> termination gateways for a given carrier, but the carriers usually 
> (sometimes?) ask that if the call fails on one of the gateways (like a 
> 503) to NOT send it to all the other gateways as well. In fact a 
> "next_carrier" function would be ideal. Else, if I'm reading this 
> right,if I use the carriers capabilities as listed it'll try every 
> single one of the carrier's gateways, right? Or is the weight based 
> selection going to pick just one gateways of the carriers each time?
>
> I feel like a lot of my confusion stems from this:
>
>    *
>
>       list of GWs/carriers (string) - a comma separated list of
>       gateways or carriers (defined by IDs) to be used for this rule;
>       the carrier IDs are prefixed with “#” sign. For each ID (GW or
>       carrier) you may specify a weight. For how this list will be
>       interpreted (as order) see the rule selection section. Example
>       of list: “gw1,gw4,#cr3”
>
> So this "gwX,#crX" notation is new and is specifically what I don't 
> see documented other than in the paragraph listed above. So before 
> we'd indicate a gwlist instead of a gateway by prefixing with a # like 
> #5 is gwlist 5. But now we have gwX, which I can only assume is 
> dr_gateways.gwid=X? and #cr3 which I'd assume is the list of gateways 
> associated with carrier_id 3. but I'm not sure why one has a # and the 
> other doesn't. Maybe I missed a documentation page? :)
>
>
> Also can the weight based sorting be used on both in the dr_rules 
> table to select a carrier and in the dr_carriers table to select a 
> gateways (ie carrier 1 weight is 75% and carrier 2 is 25%.. BUT then 
> carrier 1's gateway 5 is weight 75% and carrier 1's gateway 7 is 
> weight 25%)
>
> Sorry for all the questions. I'm looking forward to the new 
> functionality, hope I'm not jumping the gun here. :)
>
> -Brett
>
>
>
>
>
> On Mon, Apr 2, 2012 at 11:26 AM, Bogdan-Andrei Iancu 
> <bogdan at opensips.org <mailto:bogdan at opensips.org>> wrote:
>
>     When doing weight-based selection, all the entries of a carrier
>     will be used (of course, based on weight). To be honest I haven;t
>     foreseen this case - IMO, I supposed that if one GW of the carrier
>     is down, you will always want to try the rest of the GWs from the
>     same carrier, rather than falling to another carrier.
>>     Or does it already do that? If I don't specify weights, does it try them in serial order?
>     yes, but this is not triggered by the lack of weights, but from
>     the carrier definition (see the wright flag in the carrier;s flag)
>     or the do_routing() "W" flag.
>>     Is this documented somewhere that I'm missing? The regular module docs dont' seem to show it.
>     Well, you need to read the entire doc in order to get the big
>     picture. But if something is found to be missing, I will take care
>     of  it :)
>
>


-- 
Bogdan-Andrei Iancu
OpenSIPS Founder and Developer
http://www.opensips-solutions.com

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.opensips.org/pipermail/users/attachments/20120412/affebc77/attachment.htm>