asterisk users - Mar 2004 - Asterisk fault tolerance and a embedded hardware solution.....??

Asterisk fault tolerance and a embedded hardware solution.....??

Has anyoone tried implement Asterisk as a hardware based solution similar to
Soekris firewall....?


Asterisk & fault tolerance: I ran across this posting about Asterisk
and here is some interesting thoughts to ponder


http://groups.google.com/groups?hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&selm=aca5dd1d9141c07addd9d3414e934380%40free.teranews.com&rnum=14


Not blow anyone's ASTERISK bubble BUT,,,,,,,

"Show me an Asterisk system that can:

1) Have a communication bus that can survive the removal of the CPU,
and
still have calls in progress that remain active until the calling
parties
hang up.

Difficult problem to solve. One would have to have some sort of
parallel network connection. Perhaps one could have a buffering or
cache solution.

The CPU problem could be solved by a blade server or failover.

2) I have yet to hear of any Asterisk box running a fully redundant
CPU
configuration. I bet this is possible.	Especially with the newer hot
swap
cPCI bus systems and slave CPU cards.  Even better if the chassis has
and
embedded H.110, or equivalent in LAN/memory, switching bus.

Yes could be solved.

3) A redundant configuration where either CPU can talk to the
communications
boards (T1/E1), and LAN interfaces.  And which can address all boards
in the
system redundantly.

Sounds like a job for Infiniband or a platform that has a switched
crossbar architecture like IBM P-Series or Sun.

4) A redundant configuration that has either shared system memory
between
the CPU's, or at least table copies between memory that hold all
static and
dynamic call information.

5) A redundant configuration that can swap between system CPU's in
less than
20 seconds.

6) A redundant configuration that can synchronize on, and share one,
two ,
and more network clocking signals.  Plus synchronize on a independent
stratum 3 or greater clock source.

7) And can support 1,000 or more endpoints (TDM and/or IP) without
choking
on it's own guts.

8) A redundant configuration that can synchronize on, and share one,
two ,
and more network clocking signals."

Well it's a lot to ask, but enterprise computing demands a lot.


-- 
___________________________________________________________
Sign-up for Ads Free at Mail.com
http://promo.mail.com/adsfreejump.htm

Hello,

IMHO you have a problem with the hardware that Asterisk runs on.
You should really look around because there are a number of companies
selling intel based systems with a cPCI bus fully hot swap capable.
I think the only problem would be getting network adapters compatible with
* but then this is only a problem of drivers easily solved by a good
programmer.

If you test out Asterisk on a fully redundant box and you find problems I
think you'd be welcome to send in a patch to fix them so that * could
be used in "enterprise computing" instead of sending in a two page
e-mail
with the problems we all know about !

Regards

Kiss Karoly

On Thu, 4 Mar 2004, Randall Shimizu wrote:
> Asterisk fault tolerance and a embedded hardware solution.....??
>
> Has anyoone tried implement Asterisk as a hardware based solution similar
to Soekris firewall....?
>
>
> Asterisk & fault tolerance: I ran across this posting about Asterisk
> and here is some interesting thoughts to ponder
>
>
>
http://groups.google.com/groups?hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&selm=aca5dd1d9141c07addd9d3414e934380%40free.teranews.com&rnum=14
>
>
> Not blow anyone's ASTERISK bubble BUT,,,,,,,
>
> "Show me an Asterisk system that can:
>
> 1) Have a communication bus that can survive the removal of the CPU,
> and
> still have calls in progress that remain active until the calling
> parties
> hang up.
>
> Difficult problem to solve. One would have to have some sort of
> parallel network connection. Perhaps one could have a buffering or
> cache solution.
>
> The CPU problem could be solved by a blade server or failover.
>
> 2) I have yet to hear of any Asterisk box running a fully redundant
> CPU
> configuration. I bet this is possible.	Especially with the newer hot
> swap
> cPCI bus systems and slave CPU cards.  Even better if the chassis has
> and
> embedded H.110, or equivalent in LAN/memory, switching bus.
>
> Yes could be solved.
>
> 3) A redundant configuration where either CPU can talk to the
> communications
> boards (T1/E1), and LAN interfaces.  And which can address all boards
> in the
> system redundantly.
>
> Sounds like a job for Infiniband or a platform that has a switched
> crossbar architecture like IBM P-Series or Sun.
>
> 4) A redundant configuration that has either shared system memory
> between
> the CPU's, or at least table copies between memory that hold all
> static and
> dynamic call information.
>
> 5) A redundant configuration that can swap between system CPU's in
> less than
> 20 seconds.
>
> 6) A redundant configuration that can synchronize on, and share one,
> two ,
> and more network clocking signals.  Plus synchronize on a independent
> stratum 3 or greater clock source.
>
> 7) And can support 1,000 or more endpoints (TDM and/or IP) without
> choking
> on it's own guts.
>
> 8) A redundant configuration that can synchronize on, and share one,
> two ,
> and more network clocking signals."
>
> Well it's a lot to ask, but enterprise computing demands a lot.
>
>
> --
> ___________________________________________________________
> Sign-up for Ads Free at Mail.com
> http://promo.mail.com/adsfreejump.htm
>
> _______________________________________________
> Asterisk-Users mailing list
> Asterisk-Users@lists.digium.com
> http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
> To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit:
>    http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
>

Hello,

IMHO you have a problem with the hardware that Asterisk runs on.
You should really look around because there are a number of companies
selling intel based systems with a cPCI bus fully hot swap capable.
I think the only problem would be getting network adapters compatible with
* but then this is only a problem of drivers easily solved by a good
programmer.

If you test out Asterisk on a fully redundant box and you find problems I
think you'd be welcome to send in a patch to fix them so that * could
be used in "enterprise computing" instead of sending in a two page
e-mail
with the problems we all know about !

Ok Sorry, I if the email was a bit provocative. I was just trying to get some
suggestions & thoughts about hardware and fault tolerance with Asterisk.

Regards

Kiss Karoly

On Thu, 4 Mar 2004, Randall Shimizu wrote:
> Asterisk fault tolerance and a embedded hardware solution.....??
>
> Has anyoone tried implement Asterisk as a hardware based solution similar
to Soekris firewall....?
>
>
> Asterisk & fault tolerance: I ran across this posting about Asterisk
> and here is some interesting thoughts to ponder
>
>
-- 
___________________________________________________________
Sign-up for Ads Free at Mail.com
http://promo.mail.com/adsfreejump.htm