problem with failover server selection

[Glenn Satchell]

Yes, I think that would work.

I assume that you are trying to load-balance the clients across two 
routers. So you could also split the pool so that you maintain the same 
settings on both server, eg:

pool {
   failover peer "failover-open";
   range 10.253.40.5 10.253.41.254;
   option routers 10.253.40.1;
}
pool {
   failover peer "failover-open";
   range 10.253.42.5 10.253.43.254;
   option routers 10.253.40.2;
}

Over time this would average out, although initially addresses would 
tend to come from one pool first.

regards,
-glenn

On 03/16/11 22:20, Ana Gallardo Gómez wrote:
> Hello again,
>
> ---snip---
 >
> Anyway, I have a question:
>
> Can I have two diferent values in pool declarations when I use failover?
> That is possible?
>
>     --- PRIMARY SERVER
>
>        pool {
>          failover peer "failover-open";
>          range 10.253.40.5 10.253.43.254;
>          option routers 10.253.40.2;
>        }
>
>
>     --- SECONDARY SERVER
>
>        pool {
>          failover peer "failover-open";
>          range 10.253.40.5 10.253.43.254;
>          option routers 10.253.40.1;
>        }
>     }
>
>
> Thank you and sorry for my english.
>
>
> ::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
> :: Ana Gallardo Gómez ::
> ::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
>