[SERVER-1889] Support different networks / nics for client & replication traffic Created: 05/Oct/10 Updated: 08/Jan/24 Resolved: 08/Dec/21 |
|
| Status: | Closed |
| Project: | Core Server |
| Component/s: | Replication |
| Affects Version/s: | 1.7.0 |
| Fix Version/s: | None |
| Type: | New Feature | Priority: | Major - P3 |
| Reporter: | Alvin Richards (Inactive) | Assignee: | Backlog - Service Architecture |
| Resolution: | Won't Do | Votes: | 26 |
| Labels: | None | ||
| Remaining Estimate: | Not Specified | ||
| Time Spent: | Not Specified | ||
| Original Estimate: | Not Specified | ||
| Issue Links: |
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Assigned Teams: |
Service Arch
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Participants: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Case: | (copied to CRM) | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Description |
|
Problem: a) add a NIC Case b) is already supported. However, to support case a) we would need to be able to specify different networks for Impact: This would impact Other: |
| Comments |
| Comment by John Bito [ 22/Aug/16 ] |
|
We would also like to see the ability to configure clients with different connection URIs, so that the DB host appears to be in the same network sub-domain as the client, while serving clients in various sub-domains. |
| Comment by Scott Hernandez (Inactive) [ 03/Jun/12 ] |
|
This can be done today by simply having the configured names resolve to the correct network/interface by the respective clients. For example, configure all names as relative host names, not fully qualified. Then configure each tier (web/app, replicas, etc) with a different domain search order where the FQDN resolves to the different ip/interface. This can also be done by overriding resolution in any other way, like via /etc/hosts. When the client or other replica member resolve the name they will now point to the correct ip/interface depending on their role. It would good if it supported this on the server to specify priority/access control as an additional feature for cases like this. |
| Comment by Chris Westin [ 12/Sep/11 ] |
|
I just got request for this from another customer. They cite the following reasons:
|