DHCP failover?
Simon Hobson
dhcp1 at thehobsons.co.uk
Sat Sep 15 08:11:24 UTC 2007
Ryan McCain wrote:
>I was reading back through older posts regarding failover and came
>across this response to one of my posts.
>
>Simon, could you clarify why using rsync would be easier? Is it
>because the dhcp failover implementation is still buggy?
It's not to do with failover per-se, but in how to manage your
config. I believe what many people do is something like this :
Master :
<failover stuff for master>
INCLUDE <common stuff in a separate file>
Slave :
<failover stuff for slave>
INCLUDE <common stuff in a separate file>
Apart from the failover peer declarations, the rest of the config is
common to both servers, so it makes sense not to keep two different
files which can get out of sync. So management becomes something like
:
Edit common include file on master
Test config & restart master
Copy common file to slave
Restart slave
It's that 3rd step where rsync (or anything that works for you) comes
in. One technique I use is for the script that generates the config
file to use rsync to copy a config file to another machine - on the
other machine, a cron job checks every few minutes and if a new file
has appeared it tests it and then makes it the live config.
More information about the dhcp-users
mailing list