Re: connectivity redundancy setup question
From: Noi (noi_at_siam.com)
Date: 11/19/03
- Next message: David: "Re: thinking about trying out linux"
- Previous message: StvyLife: "thinking about trying out linux"
- In reply to: Menno Duursma: "Re: connectivity redundancy setup question"
- Next in thread: Menno Duursma: "Re: connectivity redundancy setup question"
- Reply: Menno Duursma: "Re: connectivity redundancy setup question"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Date: Wed, 19 Nov 2003 05:38:17 GMT
On Tue, 18 Nov 2003 18:20:53 +0000, Menno Duursma without thinking wrote:
> On Tue, 18 Nov 2003 17:37:58 +0000, Noi wrote:
>
>> On Tue, 18 Nov 2003 14:36:54 +1100, NS without thinking wrote:
>>
>>> Hi all,
>>> I am currently looking into seting up another Linux box along side our
>>> current network server/gateway to act as some sort of redundancy
>>> solution by providing connectivity via another connection.
>
> [...]
>
>>> I know this can be somewhat achieved with routing and traffic shaping
>>> in some form, but maybe this is not really what we need.
>>>
>>> I was wondering on peoples thoughts on going about setting up such a
>>> solution.
>>
>> Manually you could change the route of the broadband machine to route
>> all outbound traffic to the modem machine
>
> In that case why not setup a RIP deamon on both boxen? Have the default
> metric point to the broadband and setup `dip', `daild', or some such on
> the box with the POTS modem line.
>
>> (though you could put the modem in the broadband machine)
>
> That would probably be the most simple way out.
>
>> and in the
>> modem machine a script to initiate dialup when any account logons on.
>
> No need for that, just monitor the broadband connection and if it fails
> have a ppp-script dail out.
>
>> Dynamically you'd have to test the connection timeouts which would
>> execute a script to do the re-route and dialup.
>
> Problem i see with any of these setups is: there will still be a single
> point of failure - in the main box itself. (And if you can live with
> that, i don't see the point in useing 2 boxen).
>
The issue wasn't if the box fails just the connection.
Avoiding failure because the box fails pushes the redundancy further down
the network.
Assuming all connected boxes route traffic out the eth0 dev an external
dev (router/switch) would need to switch traffic from the failed box to
the redundant box or manual intervention to switch plugs.
> To avoid that, you could set the main machine to "ifconfig down" it's
> internal (alias) interface and have the backup machine take it over
That would kill internal access to that server.
> (upon getting packet-loss) dail-out and mail you "where on backup now"
> :-). In this setup it might be a good idee to have at least two
> connections between main and backup machines (as else the one connection
> might fail, triggering the backup routine).
I agree? For 2 box solution it's tricky. A script on the dialup box
continually tests connectivity to the broadband box. If that connection
fails the script changes the IP address of the dialup box to that of the
broadband box and initiate the dialup connection. When broadband box comes
back online the script brings down the dialup connection, resets the
ipaddr and after x minutes continuous connection to the broadband box.
Of course a similiar script on the broadband box to change and reset
ipaddr. Something like that would work in either the broadband down but
broadband box up or the broadband box down situations.
- Next message: David: "Re: thinking about trying out linux"
- Previous message: StvyLife: "thinking about trying out linux"
- In reply to: Menno Duursma: "Re: connectivity redundancy setup question"
- Next in thread: Menno Duursma: "Re: connectivity redundancy setup question"
- Reply: Menno Duursma: "Re: connectivity redundancy setup question"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Relevant Pages
|
