Failover strangeness

[David W. Hankins]

On Mon, Oct 16, 2006 at 06:24:55PM -0300, Bruce Hudson wrote:
> in the quorum can safely assume the others are down. However, I am not
> sure the DHCP fail-over works with more than two servers.

Failover can only work with precisely 2 servers per pool.  This is
a limitation imposed by the way "backup pools" are managed by the
protocol.

> > Also: I'm very hesitant to write OMAPI documentation myself considering
> > our long-term goal is to phase out OMAPI in favor of a more entrenched,
> > operational, open management framework (candidates are things like
> > dBus or IETF's zeroconf).
> 
>     Can you be more specific on this? We use OMAPI quite heavily to add
> and remove clients from our DHCP servers so I am interested in what you
> are looking to replace it with. I took a quick look at zeroconf and it
> does not appear to be doing the same job at all. I am either missing some
> part of it or in deparate need of a paradigm shift.

Sorry, Netconf.  For some reason I keep getting them confused.

  http://www.ietf.org/html.charters/netconf-charter.html

I can't tell you a lot about what mechanism we've selected because
we haven't sat down to decide on one yet.  It will probably use XML
guts.  That just seems to be "what people do" these days.

Either way I want dBus support in for the client, for better
integration with the Gnome NetworkManager applet, and to be present
for local system configuration (eg so Firefox can ask for an http
cache option, that kind of thing).  Jason Vas Dias has some externally
applied modifications for dhclient that provide dBus integration, we
want to take it to the next level.

As soon as I can get some time...


We're going to phase the new features in.  There will be plenty of
advance notice.  We're not turning off OMAPI tomorrow.

But long-term, we can't walk that road.

-- 
David W. Hankins	"If you don't do it right the first time,
Software Engineer		you'll just have to do it again."
Internet Systems Consortium, Inc.	-- Jack T. Hankins