Community discussions

MikroTik App
 
redland
just joined
Topic Author
Posts: 4
Joined: Mon May 16, 2005 6:26 am

2 mikritik as redundancy router include their configuration

Mon May 16, 2005 6:35 am

Hi all, i've set 2 mikrotik as redundancy router based on OSPF, not VRRP. The second router has higher OSPF cost.
In the main router, i have several configuration such as bandwidth queueing, nat, etc.
The question, how the second router can get the same configuration automatically like rsyncd in other OS.
Thx before
 
nikhil
Member Candidate
Member Candidate
Posts: 262
Joined: Wed Dec 22, 2004 5:04 pm
Location: US

need same info

Tue May 17, 2005 4:33 pm

If someone can comment on this . I need to do this either via OSPF or VRRP . Our routers already do bgp and routing (regular through 2 isps and some policy routes) - thats it . How easy would it be to replicate the config over to the second guy via vrrp or ospf and how seamless would the failover be ?
 
User avatar
tneumann
Member
Member
Posts: 394
Joined: Sat Apr 16, 2005 6:38 pm
Location: Germany

redundancy

Tue May 17, 2005 6:30 pm

Neither VRRP nor OSPF replicate configuration settings, and they are not supposed to do this.

You might be able to come up with a (probably not very elegant) solution with export and import commands and FTP or something...

--Tom
 
nikhil
Member Candidate
Member Candidate
Posts: 262
Joined: Wed Dec 22, 2004 5:04 pm
Location: US

Tue May 17, 2005 6:47 pm

well we cant just copy if we use vrrp or ospf because ip addressing will be the same or other conflicts and u cant do it .... MT should have some arrangement for this shouldnt it.
 
User avatar
tneumann
Member
Member
Posts: 394
Joined: Sat Apr 16, 2005 6:38 pm
Location: Germany

Tue May 17, 2005 10:07 pm

well we cant just copy if we use vrrp or ospf because ip addressing will be the same or other conflicts and u cant do it
If you were to copy an entire configuration then of course there would be IP address conflicts and maybe other problems, but you could export/import selected sections of the configuration, such as /ip firewall or /ppp etc.

But I agree, all in all that's not very practical.

--Tom
 
nikhil
Member Candidate
Member Candidate
Posts: 262
Joined: Wed Dec 22, 2004 5:04 pm
Location: US

Wed May 18, 2005 5:59 am

another big issue could probably be that we use 2.8.24 and 2.9 is around the corner . Our implementation becomes so non std that migration maybe a problem . They say they have better control on the bgp implementation in 2.9 . Lets hope there is more to even the failover system.

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: atueting, eworm, MSN [Bot], w32pamela and 182 guests