On 11/06/2013 06:41 AM, Tamas Papp wrote:
On 11/06/2013 04:16 AM, Rob Crittenden wrote:
I assume from the above that B1 does not know about B2 (and vice
5. If I have a network like this:
A2 and B1,2 are replicated from A1
If the connection gets lost between A and B site, are B1 and 2 (and
A1,2) replicated fine?
Well, that is actually one of the questions. B1 and B2 are on the same
sites and failover nodes from point of view of clients.
You can manage the replication topology with ipa-replica-manage
connect and disconnect. So if you want B1 and B2 connected you can
Once connectivity between sites A and B restored, all unreplicated
will be replicated. There could be conflicts if there were changes on
both sides during the split but majority of them are solved
automatically by 389-ds.
The main question is that B1 and B2 are not replicated to each other
automatically? What about the case if
A1 -- replication -- A2 --- replication --- B1 -- replication -- B2
If B1 gets destroyed, how B2 and A2 (and A1) gets synchronized?
Is there such a failover configuration?
No, the masters only replicate to the ones you tell them to, so if B1
went away forever then B2 would never get any other updates unless
you explicitly made a connection to A1 or A2.
Can the replication agreement be circular?
Freeipa-users mailing list