Re: carp on wan interface

Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]
To: Aaron <ml@...>
Cc: <misc@...>
Date: Tuesday, October 30, 2007 - 7:33 am

On 2007/10/30 06:05, Aaron wrote:

I think you get some T1/E1<>ethernet bridge-like devices (needing the
same box at both ends of the line), but you won't be able to use carp to
two ISPs like that.

>> You're describing something which is normally handled by speaking

This is normal with BGP.

> don't have an AS number

People with a need to multihome can get one.

> and I'm not sure if this matters or not but the second wan connection

BGP may not be flexible enough to balance the incoming packets
between the lines in that case. e.g. in the case where the ISP with
the slower connection is a downstream customer of an ISP sourcing
a lot of traffic (localpref is more important than path length,
so it can be difficult or impossible to influence this).

But if the majority of traffic is outgoing, this may not be
particularly important.

> That's why I had to play the dns short ttl game. Thus far however

That can work better for balancing load, but isn't so good for
failover. Most web browsers impose a minimum TTL to avoid certain
DNS hijacking tricks.

Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]

Messages in current thread:
carp on wan interface, Aaron, (Mon Oct 29, 11:27 pm)
Re: carp on wan interface, Stuart Henderson, (Tue Oct 30, 5:28 am)
Re: carp on wan interface, Aaron, (Tue Oct 30, 7:05 am)
Re: carp on wan interface, Stuart Henderson, (Tue Oct 30, 7:33 am)
Re: carp on wan interface, Aaron P. Martinez, (Tue Oct 30, 12:13 pm)
Re: carp on wan interface, Jon Radel, (Tue Oct 30, 10:38 am)
Re: carp on wan interface, Claudio Jeker, (Tue Oct 30, 7:21 am)
Re: carp on wan interface, Henning Brauer, (Tue Oct 30, 8:03 am)
Re: carp on wan interface, Henning Brauer, (Tue Oct 30, 5:20 am)