Re: Adapting LVS in order to allow Call-Id based persistence

To: Joseph Mack NA3T <jmack@xxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: Adapting LVS in order to allow Call-Id based persistence
Cc: pierrick grasland <pierrick.grasland@xxxxxxxxx>, lvs-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
From: Simon Horman <horms@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Fri, 4 Apr 2008 17:09:47 +0900
On Thu, Apr 03, 2008 at 06:25:20AM -0700, Joseph Mack NA3T wrote:
> On Thu, 3 Apr 2008, pierrick grasland wrote:
>> But how do you work with persistence ? (actually, with -p options).
>> Each call during the interval go to the same server, and then, do you reset
>> the timer for each new call) or no ?
> I'd defer to Horms on this if he thinks otherwise but... I wouldn't do it 
> that way. There's all sorts of problems with using a timer in the lvs 
> (-p) persistence to detect a returning client and I'm trying to convince 
> people to move to the -SH scheduler instead.
> The -SH scheduler addresses the same problem, but by scheduling on the 
> CIP. As long as the client doesn't change IPs within their session, then 
> you're OK (this is valid except for people using pathologically 
> configured proxy setups).
> I don't know if you can us the CIP to uniquely identify a client in SIP. 
> If not, you'll have to do it on call-id.

I think that in the case that I was looking at this would not have
worked well as all the traffic came from the same IP address or a
handful of IP addresses - think in terms of handling requests
from a proxy server.

However, -SH might be a good approach for many cases.


To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe lvs-devel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>