Configuration on a primary looks like
--failover-listen=
Configuration on a secondary looks like
--failover-master=,
>>>
>>>
>>> I think more consideration should go into the configuration command
>>> names, since putting a "fallover-master" option on a secondary
On 27/05/12 13:58, Don Muller wrote:
> I could be way off base here but here is my 2 cents.
>
> Maybe a better idea is to have all dnsmasq instances talking to each other
> listing each one with something like
>
> partner=
> partner=
>
> Also add two more statements. One for the primary and on
I could be way off base here but here is my 2 cents.
Maybe a better idea is to have all dnsmasq instances talking to each other
listing each one with something like
partner=
partner=
Also add two more statements. One for the primary and one for the secondaries.
primary=yes
secondary=1 or 2
> Configuration on a primary looks like
>
> --failover-listen=
>
> Configuration on a secondary looks like
>
> --failover-master=,
I think more consideration should go into the configuration command
names, since putting a "fallover-master" option on a secondary is
counter-intuitive. After all,
--- On Sat 26.5.12, Simon Kelley wrote :
Oops I had overlooked there is already such configuration :D Sorry for the
noise.
...
> Need to wonder about security, since connections to the
> primary can mess with things.
>
> This only works with one primary and one secondary: if there
> are multipl
On 26/05/12 12:26, Vincent Cadet wrote:
--- On Sat 26.5.12, Simon Kelley wrote : ...
What if there be a heartbeat link in dnsmasq through
which the active
dnsmasq would stream changes (or the whole block of
data) to the
passive instance along with keep-alive probes?
That has attractions: B
--- On Sat 26.5.12, Simon Kelley wrote :
...
> > What if there be a heartbeat link in dnsmasq through
> which the active
> > dnsmasq would stream changes (or the whole block of
> data) to the
> > passive instance along with keep-alive probes?
>
> That has attractions: Both dnsmasq instances could
On 26/05/12 10:24, Vincent Cadet wrote:
This active-passive scheme shouldn't need any dnsmasq
changes, and
arranging to monitor server instances and start a new
one when an
existing one goes down is a solved problem: it's
exactly what heartbeat
does.
Building a heartbeat harness to run dns
> > This active-passive scheme shouldn't need any dnsmasq
> changes, and
> > arranging to monitor server instances and start a new
> one when an
> > existing one goes down is a solved problem: it's
> exactly what heartbeat
> > does.
> >
> > Building a heartbeat harness to run dnsmasq
> active-pass
> For dnsmasq, I can see that active-passive is easy to do. Take your
> diagram above, and delete dnsmasq B. dnsmasq A keeps the tryant instance
> A up-to-date with the lease database and that gets replicated to tyrant
> B. If dnsmasq A fails, then dnsmasq B is started, intialises its lease
> datab
> I'd suggest SQLite as a possibility. Easy to include, and as they
> say: "Small. Fast. Reliable. Choose any three."
SQLite was my first option, but it doesn't replicate "automatically".
Easy to set up with rsync or something like it, of course, but that
wouldn't enable two dnsmasq servers to co
On Fri, May 25, 2012 at 01:17:57PM +0200, Jan-Piet Mens wrote:
> Being very lightweight, dnsmasq must not be bloated by having
> a huge MySQL or other database attached to it.
I'd suggest SQLite as a possibility. Easy to include, and as they
say: "Small. Fast. Reliable. Choose any three."
http:/
On 25/05/12 12:17, Jan-Piet Mens wrote:
> Starting just a few days before the day the machine running dnsmasq in
> my SOHO died, I was giving some thought to how I'd go about ensuring
> a backup copy of dnsmasq could take over if my only running instance
> died. Needless to say, the death of the ma
1,$s/Tryant/Tyrant/g
-JP
___
Dnsmasq-discuss mailing list
Dnsmasq-discuss@lists.thekelleys.org.uk
http://lists.thekelleys.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/dnsmasq-discuss
Starting just a few days before the day the machine running dnsmasq in
my SOHO died, I was giving some thought to how I'd go about ensuring
a backup copy of dnsmasq could take over if my only running instance
died. Needless to say, the death of the machine left my small network in
shambles, because
15 matches
Mail list logo
