RE: [dhcwg] Defining failover scenario
"Bernie Volz (EUD)" <Bernie.Volz@am1.ericsson.se> Tue, 09 October 2001 02:00 UTC
Received: from optimus.ietf.org (ietf.org [132.151.1.19] (may be forged)) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id WAA06626; Mon, 8 Oct 2001 22:00:37 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from optimus.ietf.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id VAA24235; Mon, 8 Oct 2001 21:59:12 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from ietf.org (odin [132.151.1.176]) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id VAA24210 for <dhcwg@optimus.ietf.org>; Mon, 8 Oct 2001 21:59:06 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from imr2.ericy.com (imr2.ericy.com [12.34.240.68]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id VAA06590 for <dhcwg@ietf.org>; Mon, 8 Oct 2001 21:59:03 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from mr6.exu.ericsson.se (mr6att.ericy.com [138.85.92.14]) by imr2.ericy.com (8.11.3/8.11.3) with ESMTP id f991wb011562 for <dhcwg@ietf.org>; Mon, 8 Oct 2001 20:58:37 -0500 (CDT)
Received: from eamrcnt749 (eamrcnt749.exu.ericsson.se [138.85.133.47]) by mr6.exu.ericsson.se (8.11.3/8.11.3) with SMTP id f991wba25111 for <dhcwg@ietf.org>; Mon, 8 Oct 2001 20:58:37 -0500 (CDT)
Received: FROM eamrcnt761.exu.ericsson.se BY eamrcnt749 ; Mon Oct 08 20:58:37 2001 -0500
Received: by eamrcnt761.exu.ericsson.se with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19) id <4CP9RF5T>; Mon, 8 Oct 2001 20:58:36 -0500
Message-ID: <66F66129A77AD411B76200508B65AC697B3730@eambunt705.ena-east.ericsson.se>
From: "Bernie Volz (EUD)" <Bernie.Volz@am1.ericsson.se>
To: 'Drew Baron' <drewba@microsoft.com>, dhcwg@ietf.org
Subject: RE: [dhcwg] Defining failover scenario
Date: Mon, 08 Oct 2001 20:58:35 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19)
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----_=_NextPart_001_01C15065.E7B71960"
Sender: dhcwg-admin@ietf.org
Errors-To: dhcwg-admin@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 1.0
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <dhcwg.ietf.org>
X-BeenThere: dhcwg@ietf.org
Simple ... on a LAN place a DHCP server at each end. Place clients between the servers. Cut the cable somewhere in the middle. Now, some of the clients can talk with one server, some can talk with the other. The servers can't talk with each other (nor can all clients). In today's switch environments, this can happen if you have two switches and have a DHCP server connected to each and some clients connected to each. Cut the cable between the two switches. -----Original Message----- From: Drew Baron [mailto:drewba@microsoft.com] Sent: Monday, October 08, 2001 7:55 PM To: dhcwg@ietf.org Subject: [dhcwg] Defining failover scenario The failover draft <draft-ietf-dhc-failover-09.txt> lists the following as a challenging scenario: 3.4.2. Network partition where DHCP servers can't communicate but each can talk to clients: "First, due to a network failure, the primary and secondary servers cannot communicate. As well, some of the DHCP clients must be able to com- municate with the primary server, and some of the clients must now only be able to communicate with the secondary server." The phrase 'some of the clients' is tripping me up. I'm struggling to envision the scenario needed to end up in this state. Can anyone provide a concrete example of an environment that this could occur in? How do I end up with clients that are on the same segment that cannot reach both servers? Thanks, -Drew Baron
- [dhcwg] Defining failover scenario Drew Baron
- RE: [dhcwg] Defining failover scenario Bernie Volz (EUD)
- Re: [dhcwg] Defining failover scenario Ted Lemon