From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Evgeniy Polyakov Subject: Re: [1/2] CARP implementation. HA master's failover. Date: Thu, 15 Jul 2004 19:55:36 +0400 Sender: netdev-bounce@oss.sgi.com Message-ID: <1089906936.6114.904.camel@uganda> References: <1089898303.6114.859.camel@uganda> <1089898595.6114.866.camel@uganda> <1089902654.1029.23.camel@jzny.localdomain> <1089905244.6114.887.camel@uganda> Reply-To: johnpol@2ka.mipt.ru Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="=-O+AOsa057WIIMHb6aivy" Cc: netdev@oss.sgi.com, netfilter-failover@lists.netfilter.org Return-path: To: jamal In-Reply-To: <1089905244.6114.887.camel@uganda> Errors-to: netdev-bounce@oss.sgi.com List-Id: netdev.vger.kernel.org --=-O+AOsa057WIIMHb6aivy Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Thu, 2004-07-15 at 19:27, Evgeniy Polyakov wrote: > On Thu, 2004-07-15 at 18:44, jamal wrote: > > Evgeniy, > >=20 > > Why do you need to put this stuff in the kernel? > > This should be implemented just the same way as VRRP was - in user > > space. >=20 > Hmm... > Just because i think it works better being implemented in the kernel? :) > I don't think it is a good answer thought. >=20 > It is faster, it is more flexible, it has access to kernel space... Just an addition[from private e-mail]: > would it be possible to do load balancing at the network level with a=20 > userland only implementation?=20 >=20 > OpenBSD's CARP does load balancing through Source Hashing (SH), which UCARP=20 > lacks support for. Userspace can't in principle. Current kernel implementation can't too, but it can. In principle. But better implementation should use both carp and ct_sync and some load balancing code, which should link ct_sync and carp. OpenBSD has one disadvantage in this regard: it is not modular, so their carp hooks live in if_ether.c. In Linux we just need to use connection tracking. ct_sync makes not exactly it but close to the idea. > > BTW, is there a spec for this protocol or its one of those things where > > you have to follow Yodas advice? >=20 > Exactly :) > Here are all links I found: > http://www.countersiege.com/doc/pfsync-carp/ > http://www.openbsd.org/cgi-bin/man.cgi?query=3Dcarp&apropos=3D0&sektion= =3D0&manpath=3DOpenBSD+Current&arch=3Di386&format=3Dhtml#SEE+ALSO > http://www.openbsd.org/lyrics.html > VRRP2 spec. > http://www.openbsd.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb/src/sys/netinet/ip_carp.c >=20 >=20 > I do want this to be in the mainline kernel, but actually I even don't > think anyone will apply it. > It is too special stuff for generic kernel, it has reserved 112 vrrp > protocol number and so on... > So if developers decide not to include or even not to discuss this cruft > I will not beat myself by my heels. :) >=20 > It just works as expected, it is reliable and simple. > And it does it's work, so HA people would like it. >=20 > > cheers, > > jamal --=20 Evgeniy Polaykov ( s0mbre ) Crash is better than data corruption. -- Art Grabowski --=-O+AOsa057WIIMHb6aivy Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name=signature.asc Content-Description: This is a digitally signed message part -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQBA9qj3IKTPhE+8wY0RAmHfAJ42utg9iVc1Xda9ORYQwm2cPSPNagCdEmDZ XazOtvHSPIDn8+XEzMEbfqw= =Ul2U -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --=-O+AOsa057WIIMHb6aivy--