On 2011-02-05T00:16:45, Lars Ellenberg <lars.ellenb...@linbit.com> wrote:
> I do like this packet counter monitoring.
So do I, but I'd just casually suggest that this may make sense as a
daemon, or at least per physical NIC - instead of per virtual IP.
(Andrew, much to my dismay, has changed the pingd code to instead be a
periodically executed RA, which IMHO is a detrimental change - we need
to stop executing more.)
> > +# 09: check for nonempty ARP cache
> > +# 10: watch for packet counter changes
> > +#
> > +# 19: check arping_ip_list
> > +# 20: check arping ARP cache entries
> > +#
> > +# 30: watch for packet counter changes in promiscios mode
> > +#
> > +# If unsuccessfull in levels 18 and above,
> > +# the tests for higher check levels are run.
As a general suggestion, I would not base this on the "monitor depth".
These are not necessarily incremental, and we have the ability to pass
arbitrary parameters to the monitor operation. You could either have one
parameter that you treat like a flag list or individual ones.
And, clearly, one may want to try arping|pinging the default gateway
too. So there's significant overlap here with the "ping" stuff.
In particular, your changes capture a point in time, while ping, by
virtue of going through attrd, is able to dampen changes. Your approach
will immediately fail a NIC - possibly on all nodes - if a switch
reboots, or if there really is a brief lack of traffic. I'm not quite
sure that is a desirable property.
Regards,
Lars
--
Architect Storage/HA, OPS Engineering, Novell, Inc.
SUSE LINUX Products GmbH, GF: Markus Rex, HRB 16746 (AG Nürnberg)
"Experience is the name everyone gives to their mistakes." -- Oscar Wilde
_______________________________________________________
Linux-HA-Dev: Linux-HA-Dev@lists.linux-ha.org
http://lists.linux-ha.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-ha-dev
Home Page: http://linux-ha.org/
