[asterisk-ha-clustering] New HA setup

[Frederic Jean]

> Security, obscurity and adaptability. If one asterisk fails one
> > customer is angry. If one multi-customer asterisk fails, lots of
> > customers get angry. ;)
> >
> On the other hand, it's harder to build a scalable solution that
> way... There's no reason why we could not have another Asterisk
> standing by when one fails. The issue here is that calls would go down
> and states would be lost for blinking lamps. That will always happen
> (unless someone magically adds the needed code to handle that).
>
> There are architecture problems that we haven't solved in Asterisk
> today in regards to multi-hosting. There's a lack of segmentation of
> Asterisk that could prevent overlaps. I've been doing a few things,
> like multiparking and SIP domains that are steps toward a solution.
> Tilghman has some extra headers for AMI in testing and we've discussed
> how to use that for more segmentation by applying event filters to
> those headers. Next step would be to be able to restrict access for
> orignate-like actions in manager by applying contexts to each manager
> account.
>
> The settings in feature.conf are also pbx-wide, which might be a
> problem. There are propably a lot more issues that I don't see right
> now.
>
>
One great way to have the multi-hosting implemented in all conf files would
be
to use a technique a bit similar to the 'group' keyword used in
zaptel.conf;:

[general]
setting3 = 34

company => 1

setting1 = 1
setting2 = 1

company => 2

setting1 = 2
setting2 = 2
....

Thereafter, you add a column in iax/sip_buddies to specify the corresponding
company ID.

I however don't know how such a change would be on a programming point of
view.

So there are a lot of reasons why you want a single PBX per customer
> today. Hopefully someone will fund work so that we can support at
> least 50% of the cases in a large PBX with failover, and have the rest
> that are advanced users using their own. That would be very beneficial
> for all of us.
>
>
How do you guys feel about having a local mysql slave database on each
Asterisk, for reading only
purposes?  Is this setup part of the 50% we are tempting to describe here or
would integrators
count on good hardware and optimized networks (like separate lans) and only
have a master DB
to count on?
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.digium.com/pipermail/asterisk-ha-clustering/attachments/20091105/8b7f8ab7/attachment.htm