On 7 March 2010 11:22, Claudio Jeker <cje...@diehard.n-r-g.com> wrote: >> >> When your new master is promoted, it will set up a new session with >> >> your peers. This is probably not the sort of failover you want to see >> >> happening in production. >> >> >> > >> > That's why you have multiple bgpd routers with redundant pathes. >> >> from the network point of view, packets will come from the same MAC an >> IP address (because of CARP), so ... if BACKUP will "just continue to >> maintain a session, established by MASTER", B nobody will even know, 1 >> sec is nothing in terms of BGP >> > > You can not "just continue to maintain a session, established by MASTER". > That implies that you can migrate a running TCP session plus all the > necessary state information of the session engine from one system to > another. > > -- > :wq Claudio
Time for the "bgpdsync" (as in pfsync)? Sounds like a nice idea to me. On the other hand, i fail to see a problem with having two separate routers connect to your bgp peer(s), without carp on the outgoing interface. why would one want carp them? does your peer only allow for one session at a time from your side? -- The best the little guy can do is what the little guy does right
