From: Timothy Snow (timsnow@cogeco.ca)
Date: Wed Jul 23 2003 - 17:01:50 GMT-3
Hey all.
Simple scenario. r2------6
\____5
The question states "r2 shoudl establish all sessions through r6 if it
is available. Failover should occur as quickly as possible if the paht
through r6 fails.
My solution was local-peer statements on r5 and r6 with promiscious. On
r2, I had
dlsw remote-peer 0 tcp 192.168.6.6 timeout 3
dlsw remote-peer 0 tcp 192.192.5.5 backup-peer 192.168.6.6
3 is the lowest I could have set for the timeout so I figured that was
the "quickest". After I completed the lab, I looked at the solution and
they had "cost" defined on the peers. Which one is quicker? I do see
that the "explorer-wait-time" is configurable to sub 3 seconds (minimum
is 1 second)
Thanks all.
Tim
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Wed Aug 06 2003 - 06:52:50 GMT-3