Hi Joachim,
Joachim Schipper wrote:
On Thu, Aug 03, 2006 at 02:26:40PM -0600, Tim Pushor wrote:
Well, after playing a little with trunk(4), etherchannel, and carp I am
wondering something:
Trying to achieve both firewall redundancy (via carp) and ethernet
redundancy (via trunk(4)), would it be possible and (and maybe even
recommended) to have firewall-1 connected solely to switch-1 and
firewall-2 connected solely to switch-2, forgo the trunk(4), and just
use carp to detect if either of the switches has failed, and fail over
to the other switch/firewall combo?
Am I making sense?
I'm not entirely sure what you intend to achieve, but carp doesn't cross
switches (it works on the local Ethernet segment).
Really? I guess I don't understand enough about how carp works. I didn't
see that as a limitation in any documentation that I read. Why exactly
is this?
Thanks,
Tim
