Re: freebsd-hackers Digest, Vol 233, Issue 3
- From: Alexey Bobok <alexey.bobok@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Wed, 12 Sep 2007 15:12:59 +0300
Здравствуйте, freebsd-hackers-request.
I think it's not real because of implementation of TCP protocol (ACK
numbers and so on). Maybe it's easier to use smthng like CARP to share
1 IP between multiple hosts, PFSYNC to share state tables of PF?
Send freebsd-hackers mailing list submissions to
freebsd-hackers@xxxxxxxxxxx
To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
freebsd-hackers-request@xxxxxxxxxxx
You can reach the person managing the list at
freebsd-hackers-owner@xxxxxxxxxxx
When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
than "Re: Contents of freebsd-hackers digest..."
Today's Topics:
1. TCP/IP redundant connections (Artem Kazakov)
2. Announcement: Devilator 1.0a for FreeBSD (Borja Marcos)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Message: 1
Date: Tue, 11 Sep 2007 23:33:19 +0900
From: "Artem Kazakov" <kazakov@xxxxxxxxx>
Subject: TCP/IP redundant connections
To: "FreeBSD Hackers" <freebsd-hackers@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Message-ID:
<f84a63260709110733n759224e4ufb475d9e7986da9d@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Hello Everyone!
For my research project I'm working on making some network services redundant.
And I have one idea, but I'm not so good and operating system
internals, so could you please tell what do you think. If it is
possible at all.
So, I have two hosts, which are all the same and they have some
network service which I need to make available all the time. This
service has some internal state, which is synchronized over private
connection. And at one time only one of the servers actually works
with clients, the other on is just sitting there and kept
synchronized.
The clients have persistent TCP connections to the server, and in case
of failure they make UDP broadcasts searching for server and then
reconnect. So basically there is no need to use IP-sharing between two
of them. But if the server fails, the client usually notices that
after some time-out (tcp keep alive time out I suppose) which is not
very good in some cases.
So I want to utilize IP-sharing and TCP-connection synchronization
(which is not yet implemented by anyone as far as I know). I want it
in case of failure seamlessly to switch to the other machine. As far
as the internal state is synchronized, if it is possible to
synchronize open connections as well(and all the low level stuff as
packet sequence numbers and so on) it would allow to make switch-over
to the back-up server in a matter of seconds, and the clients would
stay connected.
Is is possible to do so ? And if yes, how difficult would it be for a
person who has solid background in general-tasks programming, but no
experience with low level system programming ? And what are the
possible cave-eats of this approach?
Thank you.
Artem Kazakov.
--
С уважением,
Алексей Бобок mailto:alexey.bobok@xxxxxxxxx
_______________________________________________
freebsd-hackers@xxxxxxxxxxx mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-hackers-unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxx"
- Prev by Date: Announcement: Devilator 1.0a for FreeBSD
- Next by Date: Re: TCP/IP redundant connections
- Previous by thread: Announcement: Devilator 1.0a for FreeBSD
- Next by thread: local "jailed" symlinks
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
