On Aug 15, 2011, at 8:28 AM, Gleb Smirnoff wrote: > On Mon, Aug 15, 2011 at 07:56:14AM -0500, David Duchscher wrote: > D> > On Sun, Aug 14, 2011 at 03:56:28PM -0500, David Duchscher wrote: > D> > D> > On Sat, Aug 13, 2011 at 07:32:06PM -0500, David Duchscher wrote: > D> > D> > D> My two cents. > D> > D> > D> > D> > D> > D> We rely on the arp load balance feature. We certainly don't > find it useless. Looking at ip load balancing, it would also mean that we > would no longer be able to grow bandwidth with additional systems since all > boxes must receive all traffic. I only humbling ask that some sort of load > balancing feature be included when this goes live. > D> > D> > > D> > D> > Ok, I will make effort to support it. I will inform when patch would > D> > D> > be updated. > D> > D> > D> > D> Thank you. > D> > > D> > On closer look it appeared that restoring ARP balancing as it was, isn't > going > D> > to be easy. The essence of ARP balancing is that different vhids possess > the > D> > same IP address. Converting that to new scheme would mean that same IP > prefixes > D> > exist on one interface, which is impossible in current networking stack. > And > D> > making it possible would be a bloody hack. > D> > > D> > So I'd prefer to settle current code a bit, commit it to head, after 9.0 > is > D> > forked and released... Test and settle code a bit more... And then work > on > D> > ARP and IP balancing. That would probably require bringing in some > intermediate > D> > structure along with struct carp_softc, that would group softcs into > D> > balancing groups. That is already done in OpenBSD. Not sure that our > balancing > D> > would be compatible with OpenBSD's, however the current is not already, > since > D> > OpenBSD changed their hashing function after we merged carp(4) to > FreeBSD. > D> > D> This sound good to me. I have no requirement for compatibility with > OpenBSD. In addition, we only use the extended support versions of FreeBSD > so 9.0 will not be something we will put into production. > > The new CARP isn't going to appear in 9.x, since I am too late with my patch. > It > would be present in 10.0 and later. However, I plan to maintain an easily > applicable > patch for 9.x. > > However, I'd suggest you to try new CARP earlier than 10.1-RELEASE is out. > May be in > a test lab. I'm afraid that number of people utilizing ARP balancing is so > small, > that without your testing, feature would go untested into release ;)
Already do. We have over 20k devices that are behind NAT run on top of FreeBSD so its rather important we don't break it. :) Thanks for the update, -- DaveD
