On Mon, 2007-10-29 at 10:00 -0700, Joseph Mack NA3T wrote: > There is no cheap solution. If you have a two pairs of > directors in separate locations, then the data centers have > to cooperate (usually the same company) and they have to do > fast DNS updates.
I'd caution against using round-robin resource records in DNS, since there's a significant number of providers out there who cache records for longer than their TTL dictates. Once a given user on a given ISP has one, if it disappears (in IP terms) they're stuck until their providers caching nameserver expires the record. As Joe says, there's no cheap way to do this. One way to achieve some level of distributed resilience is to move the connectivity endpoint back to your providers, by colocating the far end routers yourself and then using their backhaul to your hosting centre(s). This way you can put the directors out in the colo, keeping the realservers back in your facility(ies). Using a reasonable router and something like BGP, you have ultimate control over what prefixes are where within your network - so you can keep the VIPs at the far end, but logically keep them in the same network(s) as the facility(ies). This way, if a fibre goes down then you still have a director alive. All that said - you say that the problem you experienced was: "Last week, there was a failure in the fiber line connecting my directors to the internet and the whole cluster went down as a result..." Why not have multiple connections to your directors from your redundant connections? You may have to give some more detail about your network topology to get much further (noting that none of it's to do with LVS at all, it's just good network design). Graeme _______________________________________________ LinuxVirtualServer.org mailing list - [email protected] Send requests to [EMAIL PROTECTED] or go to http://lists.graemef.net/mailman/listinfo/lvs-users
