Thanks Kurt. I don't use tftp so that is not a concern. I was hoping for
something a little easier like the two dnsmasq instances talking to each other
and passing information. Oh well, c'est la vie. So this is not on the roadmap?
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Kurt H Maier [mailto:k...@sciops.net]
> Sent: Friday, March 2, 2018 1:34 PM
> To: Donald Muller <donmulle...@outlook.com>
> Cc: email@example.com
> Subject: Re: [Dnsmasq-discuss] dnsmasq failover
> On Fri, Mar 02, 2018 at 05:36:35PM +0000, Donald Muller wrote:
> > At the risk of offending Geert I have a question on failover. I found a
> thread from 6 years ago discussing dnsmasq failover. There were a number
> of suggestions made that required enhancements to dnsmasq none of which
> seem to have been implemented. Is this a dead idea or something that is still
> on the back (very back) burner?
> The simplest approach is to share your configs, usually with a shared
> filesystem or drbd if you must, then configure CARP or VRRP, and set up
> heartbeat to start up the secondary when the primary fails. This is far more
> reliable than trying to juggle which tftp address to pass your pxe clients,
> is generalizable to other services.
Dnsmasq-discuss mailing list