RHI: Route Health Injection AS: Autonomous System => RHI relies on your AS to route traffic to the right POP (Point Of Presence) Pro: compatible with anybody speaking BGP or OSPF, failover quickly Cons: require an AS, so not compatible with public clouds :)
GSLB: (geo|global) Server Load Balancing => relies on DNS, depending on the status of the POP (cf above). Pro: easy to configure Cons: no standard, must rely on the same LB vendor for each POP, quite expensive, can take some time to failover cheers On Tue, Nov 1, 2011 at 7:29 PM, Vivek Malik <vivek.ma...@gmail.com> wrote: > May I ask what some of the acronyms in this email thread stand for > RHI - > AS - > GSLB - > Thanks, > Vivek > > On Tue, Nov 1, 2011 at 2:26 PM, Baptiste <bed...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> True :) >> Despite short TTLs, some client would take a long time to failover. >> But it's the only option unless you own your AS and you are able to >> route your traffic inside it. >> >> rgs >> >> >> On Tue, Nov 1, 2011 at 6:30 PM, <vivek.ma...@gmail.com> wrote: >> > DNS propagation can take a long time based on my experience. We have a >> > similar problem where we host multiple identical setups in different EC2 >> > availability zones. We have been thinking of having DNS entry with multiple >> > A records for load distribution and failover. However, that doesn't solve >> > the problem of OP. >> > >> > Vivek >> > Sent via BlackBerry from T-Mobile >> > >> > -----Original Message----- >> > From: Baptiste <bed...@gmail.com> >> > Date: Tue, 1 Nov 2011 18:17:25 >> > To: Senthil Naidu<senthil.na...@gmail.com> >> > Cc: Gene J<gh5...@gmail.com>; haproxy@formilux.org<haproxy@formilux.org> >> > Subject: Re: haproxy and multi location failover >> > >> > There is not (yet) a GSLB or dyndns daemon available in opensource, >> > but a few DNS server could be used to emulate this feature. >> > - PowerDNS + pipe backend >> > - unbound + python module >> > >> > or yourself updating your DNS server to trigger a failover >> > >> > >> > Cheers >> > >> > >> > On Tue, Nov 1, 2011 at 6:10 PM, Senthil Naidu <senthil.na...@gmail.com> >> > wrote: >> >> hi, >> >> >> >> we need to have a setup as follows >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> site 1 site 2 >> >> >> >> LB (ip 1) LB (ip 2) >> >> | | >> >> | | >> >> srv1 srv2 srv1 srv2 >> >> >> >> site 1 is primary and site 2 is backup in case of site 1 LB's failure >> >> or >> >> failure of all the servers in site1 the website should work from backup >> >> location servers. >> >> >> >> Regards >> >> >> >> On Tue, Nov 1, 2011 at 10:31 PM, Gene J <gh5...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >>> >> >>> Please provide more detail about what you are hosting and what you >> >>> want to >> >>> achieve with multiple sites. >> >>> >> >>> -Eugene >> >>> >> >>> On Nov 1, 2011, at 9:58, Senthil Naidu <senthil.na...@gmail.com> >> >>> wrote: >> >>> >> >>> Hi, >> >>> >> >>> thanks for the reply, if the same needs to be done with dns do we >> >>> need >> >>> any external dns services our we can use our own ns1 and ns2 for the >> >>> same. >> >>> >> >>> Regards >> >>> >> >>> >> >>> On Tue, Nov 1, 2011 at 9:06 PM, Baptiste <bed...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >>>> >> >>>> Hi, >> >>>> >> >>>> Do you want to failover the Frontend or the Backend? >> >>>> If this is the frontend, you can do it through DNS or RHI (but you >> >>>> need your own AS). >> >>>> If this is the backend, you have nothing to do: adding your servers >> >>>> in >> >>>> the conf in a separated backend, using some ACL to take failover >> >>>> decision and you're done. >> >>>> >> >>>> cheers >> >>>> >> >>>> >> >>>> On Tue, Nov 1, 2011 at 2:25 PM, Senthil Naidu >> >>>> <senthil.na...@gmail.com> >> >>>> wrote: >> >>>> > Hi, >> >>>> > >> >>>> > Is it possible to use haproxy in a active/passive failover scenario >> >>>> > between >> >>>> > multiple datacenters. >> >>>> > >> >>>> > Regards >> >>>> > >> >>>> > >> >>>> > >> >>>> > >> >>> >> >> >> >> >> > >> > > >
