VoIP Mailing List Archives

[msc at freeswitch.org]

On Tue, Feb 3, 2009 at 8:20 AM, Nik Middleton
<nik.middleton@noblesolutions.co.uk> wrote:

[nik.middleton at noble...]

Well Openser has better NAT handling than Asterisk for a start. In
addition it takes the load off of Asterisk with regards to
registrations. Further, I'm able to have multiple asterisk servers
fronted by Openser
Finally, I've numerous posts that * chokes with sip clients > 200. I
couldn't afford to take the risk.

But the biggest issue is with load spikes and asterisk. I've never
gotten to the bottom of it, and believe me a lot of people far smarter
then me have tried to figure it out. So... The more I can keep asterisk
out of the mundane stuff the better.

It's been said to me many times, that the way Asterisk is put together
is fundamentally flawed and this really shows it's self under load. Not
knocking Asterisk, it's served me well for the last 4 years. Heck I've
got a book being published on it in a couple of months, but for me, I
need a scalable solution, hence my interest in FS. I also don't see *
going beyond 1.4. 1.6 as far as I can tell has a very low take-up rate,
why ? well because they've changed how everything works to the extent
that hardly anything written for 1.4 can port to 1.6. The syntax
changes don't appear to serve any real purpose.

So to get back to my original question, if FS can handle a significantly
higher number of call setups, then perhaps I don't need OpenSer, that
was the thrust of my post.


Regards


-----Original Message-----
From: freeswitch-users-bounces@lists.freeswitch.org
[mailto:freeswitch-users-bounces@lists.freeswitch.org] On Behalf Of
Michael Collins
Sent: 03 February 2009 17:08
To: freeswitch-users@lists.freeswitch.org
Subject: Re: [Freeswitch-users] OPenser <-> FS Do I need this?

On Tue, Feb 3, 2009 at 8:20 AM, Nik Middleton
<nik.middleton@noblesolutions.co.uk> wrote:

[krice at freeswitch.org]

FreeSwitch is very capable of handling high call setup loads... The question
is what do you consider high setup loads?

Where it is true, OpenSER/SIP/whatever its called this week can handle a
much higher packet per second load then freeswitch, freeswitch on the other
hand is capable of handling much more call volume then asterisk... Certain
people hate when I quote numbers but I have personally deployed FreeSwitch
on projects that handle (per FS Box) > 500 calls/sec (that's 2 leg calls)
and in excess of concurrent calls... The real question is not can FS hang,
but what at what level do you call 'high volume'... What I call high volume
is a telemarketer running at 2500 calls/sec and peak concurrent channel
usage in the 10,000 to 15,000 channel range

K

[nik.middleton at noble...]

If you're telling me that FS can handle the figures quoted, that's
plenty enough for me. I have 5,000 lines PSTN /channels, possibly
double that shortly. I need to fill all of them as quickly as possible
and maintain that level for a given period of time. So I guess I'm in
the upper medium end of the scale.

Regards,

-----Original Message-----
From: freeswitch-users-bounces@lists.freeswitch.org
[mailto:freeswitch-users-bounces@lists.freeswitch.org] On Behalf Of Ken
Rice
Sent: 03 February 2009 18:16
To: freeswitch-users@lists.freeswitch.org
Subject: Re: [Freeswitch-users] OPenser <-> FS Do I need this?

FreeSwitch is very capable of handling high call setup loads... The
question
is what do you consider high setup loads?

Where it is true, OpenSER/SIP/whatever its called this week can handle a
much higher packet per second load then freeswitch, freeswitch on the
other
hand is capable of handling much more call volume then asterisk...
Certain
people hate when I quote numbers but I have personally deployed
FreeSwitch
on projects that handle (per FS Box) > 500 calls/sec (that's 2 leg
calls)
and in excess of concurrent calls... The real question is not can FS
hang,
but what at what level do you call 'high volume'... What I call high
volume
is a telemarketer running at 2500 calls/sec and peak concurrent channel
usage in the 10,000 to 15,000 channel range

K