> On 17 Jun 2019, at 18:59, Mailvaganam, Hari <hari.mailvaga...@ubc.ca> wrote: > > Hi: > > At the moment we perform TCP health check via F5 on ports 389/636 (historical > inheritance) – which isn’t sufficient for HA. > > We are moving to an env where NSX and F5 may co-exist – and have an > opportunity to re-work the LB health check for HA (on existing F5 and > upcoming NSX). > > If running NSX and/or F5 (or other load balancers) – how do you determine > health on ldap node?
What methods does the F5 support for checks? I think it could be valuable to understand this, because if we could supply some healthchecking systems or advice from upstream, this would help people like yourself. > > We have 2 read/write (1 active at given time) – replicating to N read-only > nodes. > _______________________________________________ > 389-users mailing list -- 389-users@lists.fedoraproject.org > To unsubscribe send an email to 389-users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org > Fedora Code of Conduct: > https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ > List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines > List Archives: > https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/389-users@lists.fedoraproject.org — Sincerely, William Brown Senior Software Engineer, 389 Directory Server SUSE Labs _______________________________________________ 389-users mailing list -- 389-users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to 389-users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/389-users@lists.fedoraproject.org
