VoIP Mailing List Archives

[rentorbuy at yahoo.com]

I setup two asterisk servers with identical settings
(same extensions, same queues, etc). Each one is
connected to the same amount of incoming/outgoing
links (1 PRI, 4 BRI, 1 IAX friend, etc, on each box).
Most extensions are sip and they register via DNS SRV
and other methods so that the two servers are load
balanced. Incoming PSTN calls (BRI) reach 50% each
server so that's load balanced too. I use DUNDi with a
IAX friend between the 2 servers to lookup where an
extension was registered (whether on pbx1 or pbx2).
Everything is working as expected (SIP on PBX1 calls
SIP on PBX2 and vice versa; PSTN incoming call reaches
SIP extension or group whether it registered on pbx1
or pbx2, etc.).

My question regards queues.
Incoming PSTN calls have 50% chance of entering, say,
queue number 1000 on pbx1 and 50% on pbx2 (same queue
1000). All calls will be correctly bridged to the
agent, whether it randomly registered on pbx1 or pbx2.
However, how can I make pbx1 and pbx2 "counters
consistent"? ie. first call enters queue 1000 on pbx1
and will have position 1; second call entes queue 1000
and happens to fall on pbx2 and will also have
position 1. The worst case would be if there are, say,
10 callers in queue 1000 on pbx1 and the 11th call
arrives on pbx2 with position 1.

Is there a way of coherently setting up a clustered
queue?
Does anyone have examples/workarounds/links?

Thanks!

Vieri
____________________________________________________________________________________
Be a better friend, newshound, and
know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. Try it now. http://mobile.yahoo.com/;_ylt=Ahu06i62sR8HDtDypao8Wcj9tAcJ

[rentorbuy at yahoo.com]

--- Vieri <rentorbuy at yahoo.com> wrote:

[rentorbuy at yahoo.com]

--- Vieri <rentorbuy at yahoo.com> wrote:

[astmattf at gmail.com]

Hello,

You can cluster "queues" across several servers with VICIDIAL. We have
clients with hundreds of seats taking in hundreds of lines across
multiple Asterisk servers, and the calls are distributed to agents on
all systems.

MATT---

On 5/9/08, Vieri <rentorbuy at yahoo.com> wrote:

[stotaro at totarotechn...]

Matt,

Is there any module or code that would allow this functionality
without using VICIDIAL? I have been able to have about four hundred
agents on a single box, that is not a problem (ULAW SIP only, no TDM).

For distributing queues, I just use the queue timeout value set to a
low threshold. In addition, I use a database to keep track of the
queues to load balance.

Can you elaborate more on what VICIDIAL does that my method does not.

Thanks,
Steve Totaro

On Fri, May 9, 2008 at 8:38 AM, Matt Florell <astmattf at gmail.com> wrote:

[astmattf at gmail.com]

Hello,

VICIDIAL is completely separate of Asterisk queues and does not use
them at all. It uses a database to keep track of all calls and agent
availability and when a call comes into the inbound AGI script the
system looks for the next agent in line no matter what server they are
on and will send the call to them.

The Asterisk Queues code is not really written to handle calls in this
way and when you get to hundreds of calls in the queue there are a lot
of issues that can come up with Asterisk Queues.

When I started coding VICIDIAL 5 years ago I tried to use app_queue
but was frustrated by how it kept changing from version to version, as
well as the limitations of it, and (at the time) the fairly serious
bugs. So I built VICIDIAL around AGIs, manager interface daemons and
agents in meetme rooms. This allowed for extra flexibility as well as
the ability to run the same codebase on many different version of
Asterisk. There is a slight extra load cost for these advantages, but
the ability to cluster many Asterisk servers together greatly
overrides that problem in my opinion.
MATT---



On 5/9/08, Steve Totaro <stotaro at totarotechnologies.com> wrote:

[philipp.kempgen at amo...]

Matt Florell schrieb:

[tony at softins.clara....]

In article <48245B89.9080601 at amooma.de>,
Philipp Kempgen <philipp.kempgen at amooma.de> wrote:

[astmattf at gmail.com]

On 5/9/08, Philipp Kempgen <philipp.kempgen at amooma.de> wrote:

[stotaro at totarotechn...]

On Fri, May 9, 2008 at 10:25 AM, Matt Florell <astmattf at gmail.com> wrote:

[philipp.kempgen at amo...]

Steve Totaro schrieb:

[astmattf at gmail.com]

On 5/9/08, Steve Totaro <stotaro at totarotechnologies.com> wrote:

[stotaro at totarotechn...]

On Fri, May 9, 2008 at 11:19 AM, Philipp Kempgen
<philipp.kempgen at amooma.de> wrote: