Ming-Ching Tiew wrote:
> I want to run 'vrrpd' to take care of server redundancy
> but I have a few questions :-
>
I have only tried keepalived not vrrpd, so don't take my answers as facts
> 1. Assuming that I have my LAN eth0 IP as 192.168.1.1,
> after I start vrrpd this way :-
>
> vrrpd -v 50 -i eth0 192.168.1.2
>
> I noticed that the original IP 192.168.1.1
> become not ping-able anymore. Is it an expected
> behaviour ?
At least with keepalived pinging the real IP is possible.
>
> 2. After ping-ing the vrrpd virtual IP ( 192.168.1.2 )
> for a while, I noticed that the original IP ( 192.168.1.1 )
> become ping-able again, ie I now have two IPs.
>
> But without ping-ing the virtual IP, the original IP is
> forever not ping-able.
>
> Is it an expected behaviour ?
>
With keepalived ping to the real IP works immediately.
>
> 3. With this new virtual IP, do I have to create any routes
> for it ?
If the new virtual IP is from the same subnet as the real IP, additional
routes are not needed. At least I haven't done any routes for virtual IP's.
>
> 4. Does vrrpd supports IP aliasing ? Meaning can I run
> multiple instances of vrrpd on the same interface
> with different virtual IPs allowing for IP redundancy
> for a few aliased IPs ?
>
> Example,
>
> vrrpd -v 50 -i eth0 192.168.1.2
> vrrpd -v 51 -i eth0 10.1.1.1
> etc
>
At least keepalived supports it, I have tried with IP addresses from the
same subnet not from different subnets as in your example. If it works, it
can save public addresses; you could make your router redundant with one
public address per interface using private addresses as real IP. Have to
try it to be sure.
> Again do I have to do anything to 'routes' ?
I would imagine that you need to specify route if the virtual IP's are from
different subnet than real IP. But I really don't know for sure...
Regards
Kimmo Koivisto
|
Similar Threads
Linear Mode
