LVS
lvs-users
Google
 
Web LinuxVirtualServer.org

AW: active/active question....

To: <lvs-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: AW: active/active question....
From: "Simon Pearce" <sp@xxxxxxxx>
Date: Wed, 30 Aug 2006 18:46:10 +0200
 
Thats not quiet true lvs and keepalived works with an active active setup so 
does carp and slbd with bsd. Tested with the pfsense firewall but i needed to 
load balance udp which ist not possible with carp.


Regard Simon

-----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
Von: lvs-users-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx 
[mailto:lvs-users-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] Im Auftrag von Kristoffer 
Egefelt
Gesendet: Mittwoch, 30. August 2006 18:35
An: lvs-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Betreff: active/active question....

Hello,

I hope you can clarify a few things regarding lvs:

I've searched for a working active/active lvs setup, but I can't find any...

As I understand it:
saru (which look so nice;) is not production ready and not 2.6 compatible 
keepalived project don't support active/active, neither does ultramonkey..

So the only way to be director redundant in a production environment is 
active/standby.
Then heartbeat or vrrp is used for the VIP/mac address mangling in the event of 
director failover.

As I understand it this is no problem for vrrp, but heartbeat don't have the 
necessarry features builtin to handle the problems switches and routers arp 
caches pose, which mean that if ultramonkey is preffered, carp or vrrp should 
be implemented as well...

Can somone confirm if the above is the correct current director redundancy 
options?

Thanks.

/Kristoffer

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>