https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=208681
Bug ID: 208681
Summary: [patch] CARP preemption explanation is misleading
Product: Documentation
Version: Latest
Hardware: Any
OS: Any
Status: New
Keywords: patch
Severity: Affects Some People
Priority: ---
Component: Documentation
Assignee: [email protected]
Reporter: [email protected]
Keywords: patch
Created attachment 169161
--> https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=169161&action=edit
clarified proposal for the preemption note
The handbook states in a note on CARP:
> If preemption has been enabled, hostc.example.org might not release the
> virtual IP
> address back to the original master server.
The preemption setting does the opposite of what I would interpret this
sentence to convey. Preemption needs to be enabled in order for the system with
a lower advskew value (the original master) to take the address back.
In writing this, I wonder if it also needs a sentence on where to enable
preemption (master, backup or both...). I'd assume there are very few
scenarios, where different settings on nodes in the same group would be useful
or necessary.
I have attached a proposed change for this note.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for the bug.
_______________________________________________
[email protected] mailing list
https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-doc
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[email protected]"
