On Thu, Apr 17, 2008 at 9:00 PM, Chris Buechler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 17, 2008 at 8:50 PM, Dimitri Rodis
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > One last thing:
> >
> > Is there currently any way to *not* assign an IP directly to the WAN
> > interface in a CARP config?
> >
>
>
On Thu, Apr 17, 2008 at 8:50 PM, Dimitri Rodis
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> One last thing:
>
> Is there currently any way to *not* assign an IP directly to the WAN
> interface in a CARP config?
>
No, not at this time.
> Since the IPs assigned directly to the WAN can't be used in a failover
>
One last thing:
Is there currently any way to *not* assign an IP directly to the WAN
interface in a CARP config?
Since the IPs assigned directly to the WAN can't be used in a failover
situation (if I understand correctly), I would like to not have to use
an extra public static IP to set up each C
On Thu, Apr 17, 2008 at 8:24 PM, Dimitri Rodis
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> So really the peer IP option is there for folks who don't have a
> dedicated interface, so that the pfsync traffic doesn't flood the
> network, is that right?
>
No, it's more for networks with switches that don't play ni
So really the peer IP option is there for folks who don't have a
dedicated interface, so that the pfsync traffic doesn't flood the
network, is that right?
So, in a 3-way config, do you always have to make configuration changes
on the "master"? Or can they be made on any of them?
Dimitri Rodis
Int
On 4/17/08, Chris Buechler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
[snip]
> That's something Scott has discussed changing for 1.3, but
> I'm not sure if that'll happen or not.
HEAD has greatly enhanced support for this. I need to look at
backporting it to RELENG_1 sooner or later.
Scott
---
On Thu, Apr 17, 2008 at 7:46 PM, Dimitri Rodis
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Is it possible to have a 3-way CARP setup? I can't seem to find mention of
> anyone having one up and running, so I just thought I would check to see if
> there was any reason it wouldn't work…
>
Yeah, you can. The only
Is it possible to have a 3-way CARP setup? I can't seem to find mention
of anyone having one up and running, so I just thought I would check to
see if there was any reason it wouldn't work...
I do see that you have to set up a "peer IP," so in a 3 way setup what
would you put there?
Reason
(kid in a candy store),
Right on. So far it's like you are reading my mind, that is exactly
what I was planning based on our needs. I looked for a tutorial on this and
couldn't find one. The CARP I have done and Load balancing I have done. What
I haven't been able to make work is load balan
Sai, It was whatever the default was...auto, I think.
Curtis
- Original Message -
From: "sai" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: support@pfsense.com
Sent: Tuesday, April 8, 2008 1:30:56 AM (GMT-0500) America/New_York
Subject: Re: [pfSense Support] SOLVED - Strange problem
curtis, what was t
Wade,
I'm responding to the list as well so that other folks can get the
benefit of this conversation.
We use pfSense in a CARP cluster configuration for load balancing
because we cannot afford any downtime. Our server pool is tied to a
virtual server address which is actually a CARP type V
Wade Blackwell wrote:
> -intelligent load balancing of TCP services (fail a load balanced
> node/server out of the pool when the service fails)
the load balancing does detect failed back-ends but only if they cease
listening on their TCP sockets, there's no content checking, so you
can't detect,
Hi Lloyd,
I don't know of a solution for your specific issue, but I thought I'd
at least suggest an alternative that I currently use.
I have this setup:
Network 1
-
- Asterisk Server running with a private IP address - avoids security
issues with SIP registration, since my
13 matches
Mail list logo
