Date: Tue, 19 Feb 2008 00:48:59 +0300 From: Eygene Ryabinkin <rea-fbsd@codelabs.ru> To: Bill Moran <wmoran@collaborativefusion.com> Cc: Nick Barnes <Nick.Barnes@pobox.com>, freebsd-net@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Multiple default routes on multihome host Message-ID: <6xiZ7xvVdDqVhj0EdhE90pfdIcQ@S1JitD8kpKQ9sTxL7Qyzy/kv7rU> In-Reply-To: <20080218163618.5e6672d3.wmoran@collaborativefusion.com> References: <38308.1203368454@thrush.ravenbrook.com> <20080218163618.5e6672d3.wmoran@collaborativefusion.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Bill, Mon, Feb 18, 2008 at 04:36:18PM -0500, Bill Moran wrote: > I would suggest you ask yourself (and possibly the list) _why_ you think > multiple default routes is necessary ... what is it that you're hoping > to accomplish. I'm guessing your looking for some sort of redundancy, > in which case something like CARP or RIP is liable to be the correct > solution. I had faced such situation once: I had multihomed host that was running Apache daemon that was announced via two DNS names that were corresponding to two different IPs, going via two different providers. When the first provider's link goes down, the second provider is still alive, and when both providers are alive, the traffic is balanced via DNS round-robin alias. Do you see some better way to do it via CARP, RIP, something different? I am still interested in other possibilities. Thank you! -- Eygene
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?6xiZ7xvVdDqVhj0EdhE90pfdIcQ>