[ale] Routing and failovers

[Michael B. Trausch]

On Thu, 2015-07-09 at 09:59 -0400, Derek Atkins wrote:
> However if you're just using NAT and trying to decide "hey, my main
> link
> is down, let me switch over to using NAT over the other link", then
> I'm
> afraid I don't know a good way to do that.  You probably don't want
> to
> have this automated, because all your existing connections will break
> if
> that happens.
The solution I've recommended in the past in that situation (commodity
access without dynamic routing capability) is to take a single suitably
-sized Linode system and use that as your network's IP address.  Then
have your NAT box create Tunnel A and Tunnel B to the Linode. Bond both
of them such that they are load-balanced if the two connections are
close enough in bandwith and latency to each other, or use only A or B
based on availability, schedule, or whatever other criteria you wish.
It's simple(ish), and costs $ISP_COST + $20 per month.
Sans the Linode, deal with breakage of communications at failover, as
there really isn't a way to move state like that unless you're using
SCTP, and the Internet doesn't.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.ale.org/pipermail/ale/attachments/20150805/0742e2bd/attachment.html>