On Thu, 27 Jun 2013 10:37:23 -0400 Joe Landman <landman@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > No. One of the largest issues we and our customers have been having for > years has been tightly tying gluster volume creation to single IP > addresses. This makes multihomed usage, well, problematic, at best. > Worse than this, is the use of the DNS name (or other name) which, > exactly as Jeff indicates, tightly ties the brick/mount point to a > particular interface. Please explain your terminology. "Multihomed" in a provider context means you have multiple external connections with _static_ IPs (maybe same AS, maybe different). Do you use "multihomed" as synonym for "dynamic IP" here? If so let me ask if you think that the vast majority of the users of a filesystem use _server nodes_ with dynamic IPs? -- Regards, Stephan
