new CARP implementation

[Andre Oppermann]

On 14.10.2011 20:48, Gleb Smirnoff wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 14, 2011 at 08:14:34PM +0200, Andre Oppermann wrote:
> A>  On 14.10.2011 20:02, Gleb Smirnoff wrote:
> A>  >  On Fri, Oct 14, 2011 at 07:43:33PM +0200, Andre Oppermann wrote:
> A>  >  A>   On 13.10.2011 18:02, Gleb Smirnoff wrote:
> A>  >  A>   >      Hello networkers,
> A>  >  A>   >
> A>  >  A>   >      I've updated patch&    README here:
> A>  >  A>   >
> A>  >  A>   >      http://people.freebsd.org/~glebius/newcarp/
> A>  >  A>   >
> A>  >  A>   >      Going to commit it to head/ soon. Then I'd like to make
> A>  >  A>   >   a run through carp-related PRs, update documentation, settle
> A>  >  A>   >   things a bit... and then make more hacking to restore the
> A>  >  A>   >   arpbalance feature, as well as bring in ipbalance feature.
> A>  >  A>
> A>  >  A>   Excellent! Great work. Looks good.
> A>  >  A>
> A>  >  A>   One minor nit: Carp is directly enabled by specifying the vhid.
> A>  >  A>   Would it be possible to introduce the keyword "carp" and "-carp"
> A>  >  A>   to actually enable/disable an interface for carp?
> A>  >
> A>  >  We could add additional interface flag, but I don't see point in
> A>  >  enabling/disabling CARP per-interface.
> A>
> A>  Suspending the interface from the group, but retaining the configuration
> A>  could be one reason.
>
> Won't ifconfig it down work?

Not if I want to continue to use the primary or other non-carp address.

> A>  >  btw, you can configure a VHID and don't attach any addresses
> A>  >  to it.
> A>
> A>  How does that work? What purpose does it serve?
>
> This is actually how it is configured: SIOCSVH, then SIOCAIFADDR.
> There is no practical use in addressless vhid now.

If it can cause problems or non-standard behavior it should not be
allowed and the carp status should be suspended until fully configured.

One more question: Can one interface with multiple addresses become a
member of different carp groups (with a different address each)?

-- 
Andre