<html><head><style type='text/css'>p { margin: 0; }</style></head><body><div style='font-family: Times New Roman; font-size: 12pt; color: #000000'><style>p { margin: 0; }</style><div style="font-family: Times New Roman; font-size: 12pt; color: rgb(0, 0, 0);">Right, that would impact existing established calls and subscriptions. However, larger problem is that in a failover condition endpoints would begin sending SIP Invites to a SBC (pair) that does not have a valid registration cached, and depending on the configuration, SIP port map. Depending on the re-registration interval, this could result in outbound call failures for anywhere for a couple minutes to an hour or more. In the reverse direction the inside SBC IP would be unique at each site. This would render the metaswitch unable to contact the endpoint for PSTN -> VoIP calls for the period of re-registration as well.<br><br><span><div><div><div>-- <br>Jason Nesheim<br><div><div></div></div></div></div></div><br></span><br>----- Original Message -----<br>From: "Alex Balashov" <abalashov@evaristesys.com><br>To: "Jason L. Nesheim" <jnesheim@cytek.biz><br>Cc: "Brad Anouar" <Brad@broadcore.com>, voiceops@voiceops.org<br>Sent: Sunday, September 6, 2009 5:39:46 PM<br>Subject: Re: [VoiceOps] Acme SBC geographic redundancy<br><br>Jason L. Nesheim wrote:<br><br>> If you're going to use SRV records in an Access deployment with <br>> registration caching on the Acme SBC one thing to keep in mind is that <br>> non-HA SBCs (or two separate pairs) will not share their registration <br>> and NAT databases.<br><br>I would imagine they don't share transaction and dialog state either.<br><br>-- <br>Alex Balashov - Principal<br>Evariste Systems<br>Web : http://www.evaristesys.com/<br>Tel : (+1) (678) 954-0670<br>Direct : (+1) (678) 954-0671<br>Mobile : (+1) (678) 237-1775<br></div></div></body></html>