From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Fri May 1 20:45:03 2009 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9EED110656A3 for ; Fri, 1 May 2009 20:45:03 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from nvass9573@gmx.com) Received: from mail.gmx.com (unknown [213.165.64.42]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with SMTP id DC6FC8FC23 for ; Fri, 1 May 2009 20:45:02 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from nvass9573@gmx.com) Received: (qmail invoked by alias); 01 May 2009 20:45:01 -0000 Received: from ipa27.67.107.79.tellas.gr (EHLO [169.254.0.4]) [79.107.67.27] by mail.gmx.com (mp-eu001) with SMTP; 01 May 2009 22:45:01 +0200 X-Authenticated: #46156728 X-Provags-ID: V01U2FsdGVkX19UEPAZUBVUmK+nH1wpzPZZy4DzLzhZ6Rz7WWgBNe lgpJSYw5lvBUir Message-ID: <49FB5F2C.6080502@gmx.com> Date: Fri, 01 May 2009 23:44:28 +0300 From: Nikos Vassiliadis User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.21 (Windows/20090302) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Sebastiaan van Erk References: <49F81FF2.3040302@sebster.com> <1240999037.2645.3.camel@frodon.be-bif.ulb.ac.be> <49F8269E.2010201@sebster.com> <49F89FE1.6070807@freemail.gr> <49F8CC51.2030203@sebster.com> <49F94E25.6000900@gmx.com> <49FAAF1C.6040802@sebster.com> In-Reply-To: <49FAAF1C.6040802@sebster.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Y-GMX-Trusted: 0 X-FuHaFi: 0.66 Cc: FreeBSD Questions Mailing List Subject: Re: CARP & bridge X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: User questions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 01 May 2009 20:45:04 -0000 Hi, Sebastiaan van Erk wrote: > So I don't really *NEED* the CARP ip address over the bridge (the static > arp works, so I have a working solution, albeit an ugly one; an ARP > request generates a reply from every member of the redundant cluster). Just a guess, you could try adding the VIP/32 to the tap interface, instead of the static arp thing. Don't know if it will work, it is just a guess, which looks - to me - like a cleaner configuration. At least it's rc.conf friendly. Just my 0.000000002 euros, Nikos