On Fri, 2004-07-16 at 17:04, jamal wrote:
> > Has vrrp some authentification mechanism?
> They (at least used to) claim to be able to do so.
Hm... Quote from draft-ietf-vrrp-spec-v2-08.txt
220.127.116.11 Authentication Type 0
18.104.22.168 Authentication Type 1
22.214.171.124 Authentication Type 2
1. 8bit virtual host ID.
2. Plain password.
I think even 3 is not good.
They do strong signed digest, but it does not have any kind of counter
so i do not see replay attack prevention.
> > Can it be used over IPv6? (CARP also can't but it is _very_ easy to
> > add, I just don't have IPv6 network setup to test).
> Theres effort to have it do v6.
> I agree its lame to have it as an after thought it seems
* VRRP for IPv6 does not currently include any type of authentication. *
> > > Can you explain a little more what you mean by "attching" to
> > > master/slave?
> > Consider using some abstraction layer which makes some decisions based
> > on knowledge of current HA state.
> sure; make it an API/callback/event to/from the carp daemon to other
> > It looks like we do not understand each other :)
> > Here is the explanation of the ct_sync:
> > http://cvs.netfilter.org/netfilter-ha/README?rev=1.2&content-type=text/vnd.viewcvs-markup
> > Harald Welte will have a talk about ct_sync at OLS.
> Ok, good. Maybe if you too come to OLS we can settle this ;->
:) Unfortunately no...
> Looking at what HArald has, the infrastructure seems to be the correct
> flavor. Seems something gets sent to user space via netlink and gets
> delivered via keepalived.
> I think the CARP loadbalancing feature is an improvement over what is
> being suggested by Harald.
> I have to say as well i am shocked that state is just being transfered
> blindly - but i will deal with Harald when he shows up in Ottawa ;->
Harald, sorry :)
> > > What do you mean realtime traffic?
> > > Is it something that can be achieved by qos prioritization?
> > Yes it can. But who will control prioritization mechanism?
> > Maybe userspace.
> > But with such approach we need to create each time we need kernel access
> > a kernel agent with it's own kernel<->user protocol, it's own connect
> > to master/slave arbiter...
> > With CARP just create one function in kernelspace and register it in
> > CARP using provided mechanism.
> Ok, now you are forcing me to draw diagrams.
> I attached to avouid it being mangled.
I will draw one too.
> > > In the end CISCO is going to be the loser in this of because
> > > something like CARP will take off and it cant talk to them. At the
> > > moment though they do have the market so interoping with them is
> > > valuable.
> > It is just marketing...
> > The better software the more market it can eat. Theoretically...
> I am afraid even if that sounds logical it doesnt work like that.
> Too many stupid people. If it worked like that MS would be dead and
> buried a few years ago.
For those who cares they are already done.
> > I have great confidence that Theo de Raadt will not include non
> > patent-free code in OpenBSD.
> I hope he is a lawyer or has some good lawyer advising him;->
He is an OpenBSD creator, so he is just a bit more paranoidal than
Evgeniy Polaykov ( s0mbre )
Crash is better than data corruption. -- Art Grabowski
Description: Text document
Description: This is a digitally signed message part