Date: Thu, 10 Dec 2015 20:27:56 +0100 From: Terje Elde <terje@elde.net> To: Emmanuel Vadot <manu@bidouilliste.com> Cc: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: CARP demotion counter Message-ID: <F5A58402-FBA6-4B18-B78A-D38C4AA8D3D4@elde.net> In-Reply-To: <ee17d45f9f7b1a24f76b59b09608d466@megadrive.org> References: <20151210182821.GM13477@mordor.lan> <ee17d45f9f7b1a24f76b59b09608d466@megadrive.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> On 10 Dec 2015, at 20:00, Emmanuel Vadot <manu@bidouilliste.com> wrote: >=20 > You need net.inet.carp.preempt=3D1 for MASTER returning to MASTER after a B= ACKUP state. If all things are otherwise equal, I've come to favor having redundant equip= ment not be designated master/slave, but rather "router 1" and "router 2" et= c, where possible.=20 It reduced "oh, the other is just backup"-impulses, promotes caring equally f= or either box, and reduces the idea of failover and fallback being separate t= hings.=20 Also removes "we need to fail back to the master" as a thing to do after a f= ailover, while the equality makes it easier to do changes as a matter of rou= tine.=20 Terje
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?F5A58402-FBA6-4B18-B78A-D38C4AA8D3D4>