Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Network Adapter Failover in Linux?

Posted by Cliff on from the this-does-not-mean-full-HA dept.

Brian the Wise asks: "Is there anything avaible for Linux that can compare to the IP Multipathing in Solaris 8? I need it specifically for the active/passive failover of ethernet interfaces. A search around the net has only come up with HA Linux and LVS, but they're both talking about complete machine failover. All I want is for the system to move the IP configuration from one ethernet interface to a dormant one on the same machine when it detects the link going down on a single machine. Is there anything with a proven track record out there?"

6 of 19 comments (clear)

  1. failoverd by b-side.org · · Score: 4, Informative


    http://ps-ax.com/failoverd/failoverd-pod.html


    and it needs an owner.

    --
    Indie rock lives! b-side!
  2. Routing protocol by brunson · · Score: 3, Informative

    They typical router solution is to have the dual hosted box participate in a routing protocol like OSPF using gated or something similar. Configure your routing daemon to have each physical interface advertise a zero cost route to a loopback address configured on the unix box then always use that loopback address to connect to it. If an iterface fails, the routing protocol converges and you maintain your connection.

    Depending on the routing daemon and the OS you can even get load balancing between the equal cost routes when both interfaces are up.

    --
    09F911029D74E35BD84156C5635688C0
    Jesus loves you, I think you suck
  3. Another idea. by MindStalker · · Score: 4, Informative

    Something elhse you might want to try is having both ethernet devices have the same IP. Its possible, look into it, most switches (as it hub/switch) nowadays support it, I know the linksys ones do atleast. That way you actually get a faster output from the machine, AND you get failover at the same time.

    1. Re:Another idea. by jannotti · · Score: 2, Informative

      Linux calls this bonding. Cisco calls it EtherChannel. Either way, I'm not sure it's smart enought to actually failover. I *think* it might just round robin between the multiple interfaces. But, like you say, it's something to investigate. I can at least confirm that it works with Cisco hardware. (Although you have to tell the switch to do it, the "automatic" configuration would only work if Linux spoke Cisco's little protocol for detecting bonded interfaces.)

    2. Re:Another idea. by phroseph · · Score: 3, Informative

      You can't simply give two NICs the same address. You'll have to compile support into your kernel for channel bonding. Plus, the switch you're connected to has to support trunking.

      So, the in-kernel channel bonding driver _does_ have support for two active paths, and claims to detect path failure and take corrective actions, but I have no experience with it.

  4. intel advanced networking services by galore · · Score: 2, Informative

    pickup a few intel ee-pro/100 adaptors, and then use intel's advanced networking services module - the cards will support fault tolerance, load balancing, and link aggregation. you'll need to use intel's own e100 kernel module (not the eepro100 module included in the main kernel tree), though i haven't had any problems with it.

    http://support.intel.com/support/network/adapter /a ns/linux/linansoverview.htm