<div>As i said each call consumes 4 ports at Minimum. Since we have Maximum port number 65535 and subtracting Standard ports below number 1024, so max possible available ports are around 64K which means in theory you can not have more then 64K / 4 = 16K concurrent calls running on a single machine.</div>
<div> </div><div>I did read somewhere there is some kernel variable which you can Change to increase available ports but i never used it nor i have experience how it will effect voip Services.<br></div><div>First Thing that effects is bandwidth, then NIC, then CPU and then RAM i guess.</div>
<div> </div><div>(Sorry i am testing Windows 8 right now and it really messes up the text i am writing here. Apologies for inconvenience).</div><div> </div><div>Thank you.</div><div> </div><div><br> </div><div class="gmail_quote">
On Mon, Oct 1, 2012 at 9:48 PM, Jeff Pyle <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:jpyle@fidelityvoice.com" target="_blank">jpyle@fidelityvoice.com</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;padding-left:1ex;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204);border-left-width:1px;border-left-style:solid">
<div>Muhammad,</div><div><br></div><div>I don't have the requirements that Afshin does, but I've often wondered which server resource (ignoring bandwidth) would run out first. Around 650 calls gives a load average of about 0.15. This particular relay has one processor with 8 cores at 2 GHz, Mediaproxy 2.4.4, no virtualization. RAM utilization is negligible.</div>
<div><br></div><div>If CPU load would become the bottleneck, can I truly run 650 / 0.15 * 8 cores = 35,000 calls on one relay? Continuing to ignore bandwidth that still doesn't seem right.</div><div><br></div><div>Once a relay fails due to over-utilization, which actual resource tends to fill first?</div>
<span class="HOEnZb"><font color="#888888">
<div><br></div><div><br></div><div>- Jeff</div></font></span><div class="HOEnZb"><div class="h5"><div><br></div><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Mon, Oct 1, 2012 at 3:11 PM, Muhammad Shahzad <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:shaheryarkh@googlemail.com" target="_blank">shaheryarkh@googlemail.com</a>></span> wrote:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;padding-left:1ex;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204);border-left-width:1px;border-left-style:solid"><div>OR, if you can arrange an ESX with really good specs (2 x quad core 3.2 GHz processor with at least 32 GB RAM) then you can create about 8 virtual servers running media proxy, the capacity of each media proxy in this case will be reduced to around 750~900 concurrent calls but total output of this single physical machine would be 750 x 8 = 6000 calls, you will need at least 4 gigabit ethernets of course.</div>
<div><br></div><div>Thank you.</div><div><div><br><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Mon, Oct 1, 2012 at 9:04 PM, Muhammad Shahzad <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:shaheryarkh@googlemail.com" target="_blank">shaheryarkh@googlemail.com</a>></span> wrote:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;padding-left:1ex;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204);border-left-width:1px;border-left-style:solid"><div>If you really have this many calls, then you should probably consider distributed media proxies perhaps over different geographical locations. If you have done everything perfect then one media proxy would approx. do 1000-1250 concurrent calls over 100 mbps link this may get double if you have have 1 gbps link but not more then that. So you will need around 6 to 8 media proxies to handle 10K concurrent calls.</div>
<div><br></div>Thank you.<div><div><div><br><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Mon, Oct 1, 2012 at 6:47 PM, Ali Pey <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:alipey@gmail.com" target="_blank">alipey@gmail.com</a>></span> wrote:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;padding-left:1ex;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204);border-left-width:1px;border-left-style:solid">
Hi Afshin,<div><br></div><div>I take it that you need to proxy both the sip signalling and media. I don't think you can do that on one server. One opensips server can do the signalling but you would need additional servers for media proxy.</div>
<div><br></div><div>Consider direct media path so you won't have to use a media proxy. </div><div><br></div><div>Regards,</div><div>Ali Pey<br><br><div class="gmail_quote"><div><div>On Mon, Oct 1, 2012 at 3:19 AM, afshin afzali <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:a.afzali2003@gmail.com" target="_blank">a.afzali2003@gmail.com</a>></span> wrote:<br>
</div></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;padding-left:1ex;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204);border-left-width:1px;border-left-style:solid"><div><div>Hi Guys,<br><br>I'm looking for a solution for traversing 10,000 concurrent sessions (no encryption). <br>
Is it possible this on a single modern box by MediaProxy ?<br>
<br>BEST,<br>-- afshin
<br></div></div>_______________________________________________<br>
Users mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:Users@lists.opensips.org" target="_blank">Users@lists.opensips.org</a><br>
<a href="http://lists.opensips.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users" target="_blank">http://lists.opensips.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users</a><br>
<br></blockquote></div><br></div>
<br>_______________________________________________<br>
Users mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:Users@lists.opensips.org" target="_blank">Users@lists.opensips.org</a><br>
<a href="http://lists.opensips.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users" target="_blank">http://lists.opensips.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users</a><br>
<br></blockquote></div><br><br clear="all"><div><br></div></div></div><span><font color="#888888">-- <br>Muhammad Shahzad<br>-----------------------------------<br>CISCO Rich Media Communication Specialist (CRMCS)<br>
CISCO Certified Network Associate (CCNA)<br>
Cell: <a href="tel:%2B92%20334%20422%2040%2088" target="_blank" value="+923344224088">+92 334 422 40 88</a><br>MSN: <a href="mailto:shari_786pk@hotmail.com" target="_blank">shari_786pk@hotmail.com</a><br>Email: <a href="mailto:shaheryarkh@googlemail.com" target="_blank">shaheryarkh@googlemail.com</a><br>
</font></span></div>
</blockquote></div><br><br clear="all"><div><br></div>-- <br>Muhammad Shahzad<br>-----------------------------------<br>CISCO Rich Media Communication Specialist (CRMCS)<br>CISCO Certified Network Associate (CCNA)<br>Cell: <a href="tel:%2B92%20334%20422%2040%2088" target="_blank" value="+923344224088">+92 334 422 40 88</a><br>
MSN: <a href="mailto:shari_786pk@hotmail.com" target="_blank">shari_786pk@hotmail.com</a><br>Email: <a href="mailto:shaheryarkh@googlemail.com" target="_blank">shaheryarkh@googlemail.com</a><br>
</div></div><br>_______________________________________________<br>
Users mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:Users@lists.opensips.org" target="_blank">Users@lists.opensips.org</a><br>
<a href="http://lists.opensips.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users" target="_blank">http://lists.opensips.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users</a><br>
<br></blockquote></div><br>
</div></div><br>_______________________________________________<br>
Users mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:Users@lists.opensips.org">Users@lists.opensips.org</a><br>
<a href="http://lists.opensips.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users" target="_blank">http://lists.opensips.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users</a><br>
<br></blockquote></div><br><br clear="all"><br>-- <br>Muhammad Shahzad<br>-----------------------------------<br>CISCO Rich Media Communication Specialist (CRMCS)<br>CISCO Certified Network Associate (CCNA)<br>Cell: +92 334 422 40 88<br>
MSN: <a href="mailto:shari_786pk@hotmail.com">shari_786pk@hotmail.com</a><br>Email: <a href="mailto:shaheryarkh@googlemail.com">shaheryarkh@googlemail.com</a><br>