Just off the top of my head: 1) heartbeat is limited to 2 nodes 2) keepalived config is much cleaner and easier to manage. On Mon, 17 Mar 2003, Chip Upsal wrote: > in what ways is this better then heartbeat? > > -----Original Message----- > From: Steve Mickeler [mailto:steve@xxxxxxxxxx] > Sent: Monday, March 17, 2003 1:39 PM > To: Antonio Paulo Salgado Forster > Cc: Chip Upsal; netfilter@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > Subject: Re: Using heartbeat for fall over on IPTables Firewall > > > > I'll second the vote for keepalived. > > Its an amazing tool. > > http://www.keepalived.org/ > > > > > On Mon, 17 Mar 2003, Antonio Paulo Salgado Forster wrote: > > > > > Suggestion: Try using keepalived instead. > > > > Regards, > > > > Forster > > > > > > Chip Upsal <cupsal@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>@lists.netfilter.org on 03/17/2003 > > 01:16:46 PM > > > > Sent by: netfilter-admin@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > > > > > > To: netfilter@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, "'linux-ha@xxxxxx'" > <linux-ha@xxxxxx> > > cc: > > Subject: Using heartbeat for fall over on IPTables Firewall > > > > > > > > I am looking to use heartbeat to provide fall over for my iptables > > firewall. > > I am looking for those with experience using these tools together. > > > > I plan to use RH7.2 on the firewalls. > > > > I made some attempts at implementing such a solution but i ran into a few > > problems. > > > > I would like suggestions on setup of the heartbeat configuration files. > > Pointers on the iptables startup script. and advice on what kernel version > > to use and if any patches need to be applied. > > > > Thanks in advance, > > > > Chip > > > > > > > > > > Chip Upsal > > SysAdmin > > CyberWolf Inc > > > > > > > > > > >
