Bill Fumerola wrote:
> [ this is probably more appropriate for -net, -hackers bcc:'d ]
>
> On Fri, May 03, 2002 at 08:35:01AM +0100, andrew mejia wrote:
>
>
>>[andrew]$ exactly what i would suggest. a single
>>NIC can handle multiple assigments pretty easily,
>>unless you're expecting mega-traffic. but even then
>>you could use the native load balancing/caching tech-
>>nology offered with some other freewares (like
>>apache web server).
>
>
> finding content in the above post is like a "Where's Waldo?" puzzle.
>
> you would suggest exactly what? this has nothing to do with multiple IP
> addresses (which is what i assume you're talking about when you say,
> "NIC can handle multiple assignments") neither in the traditional
> 'secondary address' sense nor as IPs aliased to a loopback interface.
> this has nothing to do with load balancing or webservers or caching or
> mega-traffic(?!).
>
> this is about representing within the freebsd network stack ethernet
> cards that support multiple (>1) unicast mac addresses through either
> multiple perfect filter entries or a multicast filter borrowed to serve
> such a purpose. until freebsd has a way of supporting this, failover
> technologies like vrrp (or any where members 'share' a common lladdr)
> will be impossible to implement properly.
>
> i believe the hangup is that adding an interface to network drivers is
> the easy part relative to teaching the network stack about network cards
> with more then one lladdr. specifically, which mac address do you use
> when putting a frame onto the wire that was locally generated? forwarded?
>
I believe IPv6 anycasting could be a solution for this sort of thing.
The front end could serve as a reverse NATPT mapping to an anycast
address. Of course, I've never set up anycasting, so I am mostly talking
through my hat. :-)
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-net" in the body of the message
