Date: Sun, 10 Apr 2016 19:25:23 +0000 From: bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org To: freebsd-doc@FreeBSD.org Subject: [Bug 208681] [patch] CARP preemption explanation is misleading Message-ID: <bug-208681-9@https.bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/>
next in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D208681 Bug ID: 208681 Summary: [patch] CARP preemption explanation is misleading Product: Documentation Version: Latest Hardware: Any OS: Any Status: New Keywords: patch Severity: Affects Some People Priority: --- Component: Documentation Assignee: freebsd-doc@FreeBSD.org Reporter: philipp@copythat.de Keywords: patch Created attachment 169161 --> https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=3D169161&action= =3Dedit clarified proposal for the preemption note The handbook states in a note on CARP: > If preemption has been enabled, hostc.example.org might not release the v= irtual IP > address back to the original master server. The preemption setting does the opposite of what I would interpret this sentence to convey. Preemption needs to be enabled in order for the system = with a lower advskew value (the original master) to take the address back. In writing this, I wonder if it also needs a sentence on where to enable preemption (master, backup or both...). I'd assume there are very few scenarios, where different settings on nodes in the same group would be use= ful or necessary. I have attached a proposed change for this note. --=20 You are receiving this mail because: You are the assignee for the bug.=
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?bug-208681-9>