All:

I want to setup two computers running OpenBSD and Carp to give me a virtual
IP to share. Each computer will have a second ethernet port which needs to
be connected to the same machine. What is the best way of doing this? I
basically want the two controlling OpenBSD machines to talk to the third
device, the server. They will not both talk at the same time, i.e. I need
it to be load
balanced. Is there a small, unpowered 3-way hub device that I could use to
hook up all three devices?

Here is an ascii diagram of what I want:


OpenBSD 1
Client Machine < > Server Machine
OpenBSD 2

A client machine will try to contact the server machine to perform
transactions. The server machine is behind the load-balanced OpenBSD
machines. If anyone of the OpenBSD load balancers is down, the other one
will get the transaction and forward it on to the server. This sounds like
it is possible with Carp. Are there any Carp experts yet who can give me
any pointers or advice?

Thanks,

Jim

Jim Lambert wrote:

OSPF might be better. Before defining an
architecture, you need to spell out
what these 2 machines will be doing?
Merely providing redundancty? Or is the
speed of the recovery important too?
Is any transaction processing going on?

What's the overall function of this
configuration and what are the critical
applications? If these are not carefully
considered you may get looping problems
and unforseen instability in the
application layer, not to mention
routing loops and other lower layer
problems....


James


> All:
>
> I want to setup two computers running OpenBSD and Carp to give me a virtual
> IP to share. Each computer will have a second ethernet port which needs to
> be connected to the same machine. What is the best way of doing this? I
> basically want the two controlling OpenBSD machines to talk to the third
> device, the server. They will not both talk at the same time, i.e. I need
> it to be load
> balanced. Is there a small, unpowered 3-way hub device that I could use to
> hook up all three devices?
>
> Here is an ascii diagram of what I want:
>
>
> OpenBSD 1
> Client Machine < > Server Machine
> OpenBSD 2
>
> A client machine will try to contact the server machine to perform
> transactions. The server machine is behind the load-balanced OpenBSD
> machines. If anyone of the OpenBSD load balancers is down, the other one
> will get the transaction and forward it on to the server. This sounds like
> it is possible with Carp. Are there any Carp experts yet who can give me
> any pointers or advice?
>
> Thanks,
>
> Jim
>
>

> Jim Lambert wrote:
>> All:
>>
>> I want to setup two computers running OpenBSD and Carp to give me a
>> virtual IP to share. Each computer will have a second ethernet port
>> which needs to be connected to the same machine. What is the best
>> way of doing this? I basically want the two controlling OpenBSD
>> machines to talk to the third device, the server. They will not
>> both talk at the same time, i.e. I need it to be load
>> balanced. Is there a small, unpowered 3-way hub device that I could
>> use to hook up all three devices?
>>
>> Here is an ascii diagram of what I want:
>>
>>
>> OpenBSD 1
>> Client Machine < > Server Machine
>> OpenBSD 2
>>
>> A client machine will try to contact the server machine to perform
>> transactions. The server machine is behind the load-balanced OpenBSD
>> machines. If anyone of the OpenBSD load balancers is down, the
>> other one will get the transaction and forward it on to the server.
>> This sounds like it is possible with Carp. Are there any Carp
>> experts yet who can give me any pointers or advice?
>>
>> Thanks,
>>
>> Jim

James wrote:
> OSPF might be better. Before defining an
> architecture, you need to spell out
> what these 2 machines will be doing?
> Merely providing redundancty? Or is the
> speed of the recovery important too?
> Is any transaction processing going on?
>
> What's the overall function of this
> configuration and what are the critical
> applications? If these are not carefully
> considered you may get looping problems
> and unforseen instability in the
> application layer, not to mention
> routing loops and other lower layer
> problems....
>
>
> James

James,

What is OSPF? I am not familiar with this acronym.

The two machines will need to provide redundancy to the server farm. There
can be up to five servers behind the two "load balancers" each processing
transactions. If one of the two load balancers goes down, the other will
need to handle the routing of the transactions (socket opens) to the
servers.

Does that clear it up at all?

Jim