Hi Ronny That's the first time I hear of a routing protocol in the corosync context. Doesn't that add a whole lot of complexity in the setup? Would it work with corosync multicast?
Stefan > On Nov 23, 2018, at 12:00 PM, Ronny Aasen <[email protected]> wrote: > > Personally if i was to try and experiment with something non-default I would > try to use ospf+bfd either with bird or quagga. > > -you get quick failovers due to bfd. > -you can equal cost multipath links to utillize multiple ports between > servers. > -All links are active, so you do not have a "passive" link, as you have with > STP > -and there is no needless duplication of data, so you do not get the 50% > bandwith loss of a broadcast bond. > -you need to use corosync with targeted udp towards spesific loopback > addresses. > -traffic goes shortest path. so allways towards the correct server. > - you can very easily expand beyond 3 nodes if you have enough ports. Or move > the ospf domain onto a switch if needed. this also easily converts to a > multiple switch config to maintain HA and no SPOF > > Happy experimentation! > > mvh > Ronny Aasen > > > > > > On 11/22/18 7:29 PM, Frank Thommen wrote: >> Please excuse, if this is too basic, but after reading >> https://pve.proxmox.com/wiki/Cluster_Manager I wondered, if the >> cluster/corosync network could be built by directly connected network >> interfaces. I.e not like this: >> +-------+ >> | pve01 |----------+ >> +-------+ | >> | >> +-------+ +----------------+ >> | pve02 |-----| network switch | >> +-------+ +----------------+ >> | >> +-------+ | >> | pve03 |----------+ >> +-------+ >> but like this: >> +-------+ >> | pve01 |---+ >> +-------+ | >> | | >> +-------+ | >> | pve02 | | >> +-------+ | >> | | >> +-------+ | >> | pve03 |---+ >> +-------+ >> (all connections 1Gbit, there are currently not plans to extend over three >> nodes) >> I can't see any drawback in that solution. It would remove one layer of >> hardware dependency and potential spof (the switch). If we don't trust the >> interfaces, we might be able to configure a second network with the three >> remaining interfaces. >> Is such a "direct-connection" topology feasible? Recommended? Strictly not >> recommended? >> I am currently just planning and thinking and there is no cluster (or even a >> PROXMOX server) in place. >> Cheers >> frank >> _______________________________________________ >> pve-user mailing list >> [email protected] >> https://pve.proxmox.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pve-user > > _______________________________________________ > pve-user mailing list > [email protected] > https://pve.proxmox.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pve-user _______________________________________________ pve-user mailing list [email protected] https://pve.proxmox.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pve-user
