=C7=E4=F0=E0=E2=F1=F2=E2=F3=E9=F2=E5, 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@freebsd.org
> 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@freebsd.org
> You can reach the person managing the list at
> freebsd-hackers-owner@freebsd.org
> 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@gmail.com>
> Subject: TCP/IP redundant connections
> To: "FreeBSD Hackers" <freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org>
> Message-ID:
> <f84a63260709110733n759224e4ufb475d9e7986da9d@mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=3DISO-8859-1
> Hello Everyone!
> For my research project I'm working on making some network services redun=
dant.
> 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.
--=20
=D1 =F3=E2=E0=E6=E5=ED=E8=E5=EC,
=C0=EB=E5=EA=F1=E5=E9 =C1=EE=E1=EE=EA mailto:alexe=
y.bobok@gmail.com
_______________________________________________
freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-hackers-unsubscribe@freebsd.org"