Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Thu, 10 Dec 2015 20:27:56 +0100
From:      Terje Elde <>
To:        Emmanuel Vadot <>
Subject:   Re: CARP demotion counter
Message-ID:  <>
In-Reply-To: <>
References:  <20151210182821.GM13477@mordor.lan> <>

Next in thread | Previous in thread | Raw E-Mail | Index | Archive | Help

> On 10 Dec 2015, at 20:00, Emmanuel Vadot <> wrote:
> 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=

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=


Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <>