[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

[VRRP] Default Value of Accept_Mode



[WG Chair Hat Off]

 

Folks,

 

During the IESG review of the unified VRRP draft, Dan, Operations and Management AD, questioned the default value of the Accept_Mode in the draft.  The current default value is False and he would like us to reconsider that (his comments in the end of this email).

 

We had discussions about this on the mailing list.  However, I don’t remember having a clear WG consensus for either default value.

 

Given the fact that the default value has absolutely no impact on the interoperability and the fact that both the values have their pros and cons, we are proposing that the draft should leave the default value to the implementations.  The draft would say that the implementations are free to choose any default value.

 

Please let us know if you agree/disagree.  If we do not hear anything back, we will assume that the WG agrees J

 

Regards

Mukesh

 

Dan’s  Comment:

=============

3. Accept_Mode defaulting to false seems unrealistic at least in deployments

I've seen.  Using accept-data config knob seems very common. Unless enable

Accept_Mode, when the virtual address moves to the Backup, the virtual address

no longer responds to ping; I've also seen an implementation to reject pings to

the virtual IP when it's in Master mode, but this seems like an implementation

bug if so (I'd like a confirmation if this is the case).

 

In any case, this restriction makes troubleshooting and deployment a pain; hosts

and management systems often ping the gateway address to see if the network is

working, and this kills that assumption.

 

Unless the WG has recently discussed and reached consensus that Accept_Mode

should still default to false, I'd consider revisiting this position.