RV042 Failover

Hello!
Need some help with this situation.
Have one RV042 configured like ahead:
2 WAN links in Smart Link backup mode (WAN1 Primary)
WAN1 - Cable modem
WAN2 - DSL router
Network service Detection
Remote host: 8.8.8.8
Dns Lookup host: www.google.com
When i poweroff Cable Modem, NSD Fail occurs and failover works correctly.
But, when i remove only the data cable of the Cable Modem, simulanting a problem inside Cable Modem Company, failover not occurs.
Log show NSD FAIL WAN but nothing works to outside.
I've tried load balance mode in the same config above but this doesn't works too.

Hello!
Similar problem here , but with a rv320 with the latest firmware !
Best regards
Philipp

Similar Messages

RV042 Failover does not work properly in certain WAN1 signal condition

Our RV042 has cable modem in WAN1 and ADSL in WAN2; it is set in smart link backup mode.
In certain cases of WAN1 signal loss, RV042 seems not to detect this condition. Consequently it does not switch automatically to WAN2.
One way to get it to switch is to disconnect WAN1 modem power (manually in situ), then WAN2 assumes as active link.
We conclude that, in the mentioned cases, although WAN1 signal is not good enough to provide internet service, RV042 makes a wrong decision and determines WAN1 is ok.
Is there a way to have a correct switchover for these cases?
May be with a firmware fix, or an internal user programming/setting, or different router model- or a combination of these elements, or any other solution you can provide us.

Eduardo,
It sounded like you have the device setup properly, however under the system management tab, it has the ways it will detect if there is a disconnect.
If you have wan 1 and wan 2 set checked beside the default gateway it will ping the gateway and if it gets a reply from the modem, it will stay connected.
You might not have internet connectivity, but the router thinks you do cause it can ping the modem. If you uncheck this and set it to remote host. Then
set wan 1 to www.google.com and wan 2 to www.yahoo.com. This way it has to get all the way out to the internet to resolve internet names. If it can't,
it starts the failover process.

Setting up failover in an RV042 V3

I have a new (about 4 months old) RV042 V3 4.0.0.07 firmware that I am trying to use in failover mode. I have a SOHO and I normally use cable Internet connection. It is quite fast (15 megabit), but not super reliable. I have added DSL (3.3 megabit) which is five nines (supposedly) but not so quick.
I have a Westell 7500 wireless DSL modem located in the basement, where the telephone lines enter the building. This gives me a wireless link to the second floor server room through a wireless router that connects to WAN 2 of the RV042.   The cable modem is in the server room and connects directly to the WAN 1 of the RV042. The cable works, but when it goes down, the DSL link comes up but does not allow Internet traffic. The RV042 is set up as a Bridge and I have set up port forwarding to get the cable to work and used similar firewall commands to route the traffic if the router switched over. I suspect that the problem is in the port forwarding (port 80) or the firewall rules(which are pretty simple) because everything looks like it switches over, but it just doesn't work on WAN2.
Can anyone shed any light on this problem, which does not seem like it should exist?
Thanks, Bob

If you plug a PC into R2, do you have internet access? Yes, Ethernet works from R2 including DHCP to the plugged in PC
What is the Default Gateway? See data below:
Laptop plugged into R2
Ethernet adapter Local Area Connection:
Connection-specific DNS Suffix . : westell.com
Description . . . . . . . . . . . : Realtek RTL8139/810x Family Fast Ethernet NIC
Physical Address. . . . . . . . . : **Deleted**
Dhcp Enabled. . . . . . . . . . . : Yes
Autoconfiguration Enabled . . . . : Yes
IP Address. . . . . . . . . . . . : 192.168.2.61
Subnet Mask . . . . . . . . . . . : 255.255.255.0
Default Gateway . . . . . . . . . : 192.168.2.22
DHCP Server . . . . . . . . . . . : 192.168.2.1
DNS Servers . . . . . . . . . . . : **Deleted**
Route Test from Laptop via R2
tracert google.com
Tracing route to google.com over a maximum of 30 hops:
1 <1 ms <1 ms <1 ms 192.168.2.22
2 1 ms 1 ms 1 ms 192.168.2.1
Router 2 IP Data:
Local IP Address 192.168.2.22
Subnet Mask 255.255.255.0
Gateway 192.168.2.1
Local DNS 192.168.2.1
Default Gateway on WAN2: Initially DHCP value from R1, but I changed it to use a static IP setup as you suggested, but since a PC works on R2 I figured it was OK. The DHCP numbers were the exact numbers that I assigned as static as suggested in the your next question. Apparently this change makes WAN2 work. Not sure if that was the only problem because I also gave R4 a static address of 192.168.10.2, figuring if one static was good, then two statics would be at least twice as good.
Have you tried giving WAN2 a static IP address and gateway that points to R1?
I did as you suggested and put static WAN2 as 192.168.2.2. It makes it cleaner. Please look at my firewall rules, I know that at least one is not right, and if I look at the SysLog I get lots of questions. There is a web server at 192.168.10.11, which has always been there but not on the drawing.
Default gateway on WAN1: From DHCP from cable company modem and it works as it is supposed to:
IP Add. xx.xx.xx.71, Default Gate. xx.xx.xx.1, Dyndns enabled
I have added an updated network drawing and some router configurations. Note the stuff in the SysLog, which I can't get figured out. The syslog concerns me that my firewall is not set up right.   I added the webserver to the drawing, which I have updated many times this weekend as work proceeded.
*** Solution Comments ***
As noted in the multiple edited section above, adding static addresses appears to have fixed my failover problem. I had left the question open because I was seeing firewall log activity. After several days of digging around I figured out what eth0 and eth1 were.   They are LAN and WAN1 respectively. Since the system is operating with WAN2 connected and WAN1 blocked this is apparently normal operation since WAN1 is blocked by policy.
Since it appears to fail over after changing to static addresses, I guess this question was answered by mpyhala when he asked me if I was using static addresses.   I have always done that, and I cannot imagine why I didn't do it this time. Thanks for getting me on the right track.
As for the Log activity, it is to be expected and the log activity appears to make sense, when you consider the traffic path.
Thanks, for the help
Message was edited by: Bob Lawson
Message was edited by: Bob Lawson
Message was edited by: Bob Lawson

RV042 Smart Link / Failover is Sticky

RV042 in Router mode.
WAN1 preferred.
With Smart Link it seems to work to a point.
When WAN1 fails, it fails over to WAN2.
But then it gets stuck on WAN2 and I have to manually switch to WAN2 preferred and then back to WAN1 preferred to get WAN1 connection to return.
The test IP addresses should be just fine as set.
Is there something I should be doing differently?

I really appreciate the help. I think I would do better if I understood the definition and purpose and INTERACTION of those 4 entries.
Well, I can figure out "Default Gateway" ... I think. But maybe I don't understand the designer's context for this one even.
And, I tried entering the DNS Host and an IP wouldn't do so I put in the URL. I also think I can figure that one out OK.
Then there are: ISP and Remote Hosts.
According to the documentation with my comments at "***"
Default Gateway:
If you check this item, the Router will ping the default gateway first.
***OK. That's easy. But it doesn't say "you must check this item". So, I had not.
ISP Host:
After ping Default Gateway, the Router will ping ISP Host “Retry timeout" later. The ISP Host is provided by ISP.
***I guess I just pick an IP address belonging to the ISP or what? Or I could pick the public address gateway at the ISP.
Remote Host:
Enter the IP address of Remote Host that you’re going to ping.
***OK. So I could pick anything in the public address space that normally works, eh? But, does it necessarily have to be a public address? How about an upstream address in my network?
DNS Lookup Host: Enter the Host Name or Domain Name that you’re going to ping.
***Well, I wouild have thought that this means the host name of the ISP DNS server. But here it seems to say it can be almost any URL. Is the point here that it's a test of DNS service?
I think perhaps this will help reveal where I'm getting hung up. I should think that the design intends to test the closest connection first and surely failover if it fails. Then on to the next, and the next, etc.
If that's the case then I should think one could pick a single IP address to test and that's all. Is that correct. That's what I've been doing because I think that will effect the behavior I need.
I look forward to hearing more. Thank You!!

RV042 questions

Hi
I have a client in a single location with around 30 employees. They currently have Covad full T1 and VOIP running through a couple of Cisco managed switches. Right now I have them using a Netgear FVS114, which is pretty stable. I connect through an IPSec tunnel for admin purposes.
Their T1 seems to have occasional outages, and at 1.5Mb is often saturated. I'd like to get them on a dual-WAN system with a DSL supplier (probably AT&T), and wanted to know if the RV042 would be a good fit for their situation. I have a couple of questions for anyone who has experience with this setup.
1) Will it work happily with the VOIP service I have on one of the connections? Can I do any kind of QOS/bandwidth management with this unit, or should I in fact leave the VOIP QOS to Cisco's management?
2) I understand I can set the unit up in load-balance or failover mode. I'd love to have it working most of the time as a load-balancer between the two connections, to get higher throughput for the office. If it's in load-balance mode, and one of the connections fails (eg, the T1), will it switch over to the second connection automatically?
3) My preferred method of VPN through the FVS114 is an IPSec configuration with IPSecuritas on Mac. It's likely that we'll increase the use of VPN at the office, with potentially up to 5 people creating a connection to the office from their home location. What's the throughput for the RV042 for each IPSec connection?
3) Are there any catches I should watch out for when setting up a dual WAN? I understand that some websites which track IP addresses may not work correctly, since a particular user may connect to a site from both WAN ports in succession. Can anyone add detail to this issue, and what kinds of sites may not work with this configuration? Is there any way to maintain sessions through one port or the other?
I think that's all for now - very grateful for any help provided.
Matt

>1) Can I do any kind of QOS/bandwidth management with this unit
SR: I recall there is an appendix in the user guide that provides instructions on using the Bandwidth Management feature for VoIP services.
>2) I understand I can set the unit up in load-balance or failover mode. I'd love to have it working most of the time as a load-balancer between the two connections, to get higher throughput for the office. If it's in load-balance mode, and one of the connections fails (eg, the T1), will it switch over to the second connection automatically?
SR: In load balance mode, if a WAN goes down (as detected by the NSD mechanism), all traffic will be redirected to the other WAN automatically. There might be a couple of minutes before the redirection happens.
>3) My preferred method of VPN through the FVS114 is an IPSec configuration with IPSecuritas on Mac. It's likely that we'll increase the use of VPN at the office, with potentially up to 5 people creating a connection to the office from their home location. What's the throughput for the RV042 for each IPSec connection?
SR: RV042 can handle about 50Mbps of IPSec traffic at a maximum. This capacity will be shared by all IPsec connections.
>3) Are there any catches I should watch out for when setting up a dual WAN? I understand that some websites which track IP addresses may not work correctly, since a particular user may connect to a site from both WAN ports in succession. Can anyone add detail to this issue, and what kinds of sites may not work with this configuration? Is there any way to maintain sessions through one port or the other?
SR: RV042 will direct all packets within a TCP connection to the same WAN port. If a site requires 2 TCP connections coming from the same ip address during the login process, users may experience login failure. An easy workaround is to bind the https service to a dedicated WAN port. In case the dedicated WAN port goes down, the router will still redirect the https traffic to the other WAN port.

RV042 Load Balancing - Not Balancing

I recently purchased an RV042 ver.3 Dual WAN router to replace my ver.2 router. I have found that the load balancing feature is not working like it did in the ver.2 router. Using the Nice Trace app on my iPad, I could see the ver.2 router toggle between the 2 WAN inputs. However, the ver.3 router seems to remain fixed on one of the WAN inputs and never switches to the other. I have upgraded the firmware to the latest v4.2.2.08, but that did not change the load balancing. Has anyone else seen this, and is there a fix?

Is there any particular reason that made you move to the v3 router? If not, put the v2 one back in service. Each version of these routers have different issues, and if you have one working that meets all your needs, just leave it alone.
That being said, have you checked the setting on the v3 to see if it's in failover? Also, are there any protocol bindings? Have you entered the correct amount of bandwidth for each LAN? This affects the load balancing quite a bit.
Huntsville's Premiere Car and Bike e-magazine: www.huntsvillecarscene.com

RV042 Load Balancing

Hello,
I just setup my RV042 and my 2 connections are load balancing fine on it. However, I'd like to prioritize connection A on computer A and prioritize connection B on computer B.
I couldn't find an option to do it, I tried to do it in a very hacky way by throttling Wan B on Computer A to 1kbit/sec while giving it max power on Wan A, and then did the same thing for Computer B/Wan B. It didn't really work as expected, the 1kbit/sec still picked up traffic and executed it at 1kbit/sec instead, not my biggest success.
So, is there actually a way to tell the routeur to assign a specific connection to a specific computer?
Thanks

Is there any particular reason that made you move to the v3 router? If not, put the v2 one back in service. Each version of these routers have different issues, and if you have one working that meets all your needs, just leave it alone.
That being said, have you checked the setting on the v3 to see if it's in failover? Also, are there any protocol bindings? Have you entered the correct amount of bandwidth for each LAN? This affects the load balancing quite a bit.
Huntsville's Premiere Car and Bike e-magazine: www.huntsvillecarscene.com

RV042 WAN Slow (Yep, another post about this)

Hi,
I've searched and read other posts on this here and else where (via google) but cannot seem to resolve the situation.
To help save time I've compiled a list of various tests (including bypassing the RV042) and configuration options.
Tests (via DSL Reports) :
without RV042 (direct connection to T1) 1410 up / 1410 down
WITH RV042 1094 up / 763kb down
Hardware:
new Cisco RV042
Firmware Version: 1.3.12.19-tm
Internet Providers:
WAN 1: Covad T1 via Samsung iBG1000 T1 Router (NAT Disabled, RV042 has been assigned public IP Address)
WAN 2 (Failover): Atlantic BroadBand (via Surf Board Cable Modem)
RV042 Configuration:
MTU has been set to Auto, 1500, and 1492 (currently set to 1500) - speeds remain slow
SPI Enabled & Disabled - no change
Setting for Internet Port Speeds (also tried 1512 up for WAN 2 in case of GUI related error)
Interface
Upstream
(Kbit/Sec)
Downstream
(Kbit/Sec)
WAN1
WAN2
I think that about covers it, please let me know if there is any other info you need me to provide and thank you in advance for any help you can give.
- Jordan

Oh I forgot to mention that on the Easy Access it says my wifi is on but at the top of the phone it still says 4G. So is it on or not?

RV042 won't load balance

Good morning everyone,
I've had the RV042 router for some time. I currently have it setup with two internet connections. One from Speakeasy.net and the other from comcast. My problem is that, even though I have "weighted round robin" load balancing turned on, the only connection that ever works for downloading or uploading stuff is the speakeasy connection. The only time the comcast connection turns on is when there's a problem with the speakeasy connection.
I tried configuring it to prefer the comcast connection by setting the maximum download speed at 50Mb/s and the speakeasy max at 15Mb/s and I get nothing. I have it set to load balancing mode and it is not simply set to the fail over mode. Is there a way to get both of my connections working in an alternating fashion? I would like the router to know that if it's downloading movies of a *sensitive type* on the speakeasy connection, to use my comcast connection to continue my work because it has no load on it at the time.

Hello,
Many thanks for the screen shots and updates. A couple of thoughts.
The load balancing ought to load balance by sending more out of the one link than the other.
If I understand you correctly, it is not using the second connection except only when the primary is down. It appears you have this configured correctly.
For outgoing traffic I would expect to see some load balancing, although load balancing is not usually a perfect ratio ... but in your case you are not seeing anything.
For incoming traffic, this should depend based on the outgoing address. For example, if the WAN 1 interface was used, then the packets would be using the NAT'ed address of WAN1 and as such these packets should return via this interface.
Do you have any 1-to-1 NAT configured? I am wondering if this could skew the results by favoring one outgoing port and not the other.
Can you please check again to verify that there is in fact no load balancing what-so-ever? Many thanks in advance for your efforts.
For the failover however, you should probably use the other option which is to 'remove the connection' when down. The setting you have now will not remove the connection.
As for preferring one interface over another for downloads and the like, you can try protocol bindings. Example, lets say that your downloads occur on port 80. If you do not use port 80 for your work, you can bind these to the alternate WAN connection. Just a thought ... and this might allow you to 'direct' some traffic for recreational and the others for biz.
When using port binding, failover will still work.
I noticed a newer version of code, dated July 30 2009. This has a different date but appears to be the same version #. The link to the downloads is here:
http://tools.cisco.com/support/downloads/pub/Redirect.x?mdfid=282413304
Have a good night, Happy Thanksgiving too.
Andrew Lee Lissitz

RV042 not annoucing vpn routes over rip v2

Problem: RV042 is not announcing a class C VPN route via RIP to other routers. It announces the gateway public address via rip, but not the VPN route.
I am attempting to use a pair of RV042 as a redundant links between our home office and a branch. The home office and branch is already connected via a T1. Each location also has an additional cable internet connection with public IP address and a cisco 1921 router controlling the traffic.
The 1921 routers are using OSPF to route traffic over the T1 and have RIPv2 enabled to talk to their local respective RV042s. Here is a description of how the network is set up.
MainRouter - cisco 1921
   Eth0 - Network is 192.168.41.0/24
             IP address is 192.168.41.20
   Eth0/1 - Network 10.1.1.1 255.255.255.254
            T1 connection to branch router
MainRV - RV042 v3 with fw 4.2.1.02
   Wan1 - Public IP A X.X.X.X
    LAN- Network 192.168.41.0/24
              IP 192.168.41.11 255.255.255.0
BranchRouter - cisco 1921
Eth0/0 - Network is 192.168.46.0/24
               IP address is 192.168.46.10
Eth0/1 - Network 10.1.1.2 255.255.255.254
            T1 connection to main router
BranchRV - RV042 v3 with fw 4.2.1.02
Wan1 - Public IP B Y.Y.Y.Y
    LAN - Network 192.168.46.0/24
              IP 192.168.46.11 255.255.255.0
I have established a VPN from BranchRV to MainRV and it passes traffic correctly. My "MainRouter "
rip database looks like this....
192.168.41.0/24    auto-summary
192.168.41.0/24    directly connected, GigabitEthernet0/0
X.X.X.X/24    auto-summary
X.X.X.Z/30
    [1] via 192.168.46.11, 00:00:01, GigabitEthernet0/0
Notice that there is no route to 192.168.46.0/24 in there....
Now here is the kicker, just messing around, I changed the VPN settings to use subnets 10.0.10.0/24 on MainRV and 10.0.11.0/24 on BranchRV instead of 192.168.41.0/24 and 192.168.46.0/24 respectivly. After I tried that the routes for the 10.0.3.0 were announced via RIP
Here is what the MainRouter's rip database looked like after I tried that
10.0.0.0/8    auto-summary
10.0.11.0/24
    [2] via 192.168.41.11, 00:00:18, GigabitEthernet0/0
192.168.41.0/24    auto-summary
192.168.41.0/24    directly connected, GigabitEthernet0/0
X.X.X.X/24    auto-summary
X.X.X.Y/30
    [1] via 192.168.41.11, 00:00:18, GigabitEthernet0/0
What gives? This really looks like a bug to me...
Anyhow I'm thinking a workaround might be to set up a GRE tunnel across those 10.0.X.X subnets to the other side so I can at least dynamically route traffic accross.... Without the RIP routes being announced I don't have automatic failover!
Thanks for your help,
   Curtis

Yes as was explained to me previously.... by Jason Nickle multicast does not cross a site-to-site tunnel.
That is not what I want to have happen. What I want is for my RV042 to announce it's VPN routes to other routers on the same physical network. Which it currently is not doing.
Site 1
    Cisco IOS Router X - main router, local network traffic runs across this
     RVO42 X - has VPN link to RVO42 Y at Site 2
Site 2
Cisco IOS Router Y - main router, local newtok traffic runs acress this
   RVO42 Y - has VPN link to RVO42 X at Site 1
The problem is that RV042 Y doesn't tell Router Y that it has a route to Site 1. And RV042 X doesn't tell Router X that it has a route to Site 2. So they are not locally announcing via RIP, the routes they have TO the respective remote sites.
What I was trying to say in my original post, is that the router will announce VPN routes if the vpn subnets are a class A 10.X.X.X subnet, but it doesn't announce them if they are a class C 192.168.X.X subnet. So what I am doing should be working, however it is not.

Use of QuickVPN to access network behind a RV042

Hello,
I have a RV042, and all incoming WAN requests are forwarded to a network located behind the RV042.
Internal IP range of the RV042 is 192.168.0.x (RV042 IP is 192.168.0.1, and everything is forwarded to SG300 L3 with IP 192.168.0.2), and some networks 10.0.x.x can be reached via the SG300 L3.
This works fine.
And from the "Diagnostic tool" of the RV042, I can ping all devices in network 10.0.x.x.
I can connect to the RV042 using QuickVPN.
I can ping the 192.168.0.2 interface of the SG300, but... I cannot reach the networks located behind the SG300.
How can I reach the servers located behind the RV042, in network 10.0.x.x ?
Thanks in advance for your help.

Hi,
that depends on the actual application you entered. the application is also an open entry and you could create your own application and then enter additional parameters if needed
ingo

In oracle rac, If user query a select query and in processing data is fetched but in the duration of fetching the particular node is evicted then how failover to another node internally?

In oracle rac, If user query a select query and in processing data is fetched but in the duration of fetching the particular node is evicted then how failover to another node internally?

The query is re-issued as a flashback query and the client process can continue to fetch from the cursor. This is described in the Net Services Administrators Guide, the section on Transparent Application Failover.

Reporting Services as a generic service in a failover cluster group?

There is some confusion on whether or not Microsoft will support a Reporting Services deployment on a failover cluster using scale-out, and adding the Reporting Services service as a generic service in a cluster group to achieve active-passive high
availability.
A deployment like this is described by Lukasz Pawlowski (Program Manager on the Reporting Services team) in this blog article
http://blogs.msdn.com/b/lukaszp/archive/2009/10/28/high-availability-frequently-asked-questions-about-failover-clustering-and-reporting-services.aspx. There it is stated that it can be done, and what needs to be considered when doing such a deployment.
This article (http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/library/bb630402.aspx) on the other hand states: "Failover clustering is supported only for the report server database; you
cannot run the Report Server service as part of a failover cluster."
This is somewhat confusing to me. Can I expect to receive support from Microsoft for a setup like this?
Best Regards,
Peter Wretmo

Hi Peter,
Thanks for your posting.
As Lukasz said in the
blog, failover clustering with SSRS is possible. However, during the failover there is some time during which users will receive errors when accessing SSRS since the network names will resolve to a computer where the SSRS service is in the process of starting.
Besides, there are several considerations and manual steps involved on your part before configuring the failover clustering with SSRS service:
Impact on other applications that share the SQL Server. One common idea is to put SSRS in the same cluster group as SQL Server. If SQL Server is hosting multiple application databases, other than just the SSRS databases, a failure in SSRS may cause
a significant failover impact to the entire environment.
SSRS fails over independently of SQL Server.
If SSRS is running, it is going to do work on behalf of the overall deployment so it will be Active. To make SSRS Passive is to stop the SSRS service on all passive cluster nodes.
So, SSRS is designed to achieve High Availability through the Scale-Out deployment. Though a failover clustered SSRS deployment is achievable, it is not the best option for achieving High Availability with Reporting Services.
Regards,
Mike Yin
If you have any feedback on our support, please click
here
Mike Yin
TechNet Community Support

What is solution of nat failover with 2 ISPs?

Now I have lease line link to 2 ISPs for internet connection. I separate packets of users by accesslist such as www go to ISP1 and mail or other protocol go to ISP2 . Let's say link go to ISP1 down I need www traffics failover to ISP2 and vice versa.
Problem is acl on nat statement?
If you config about this.
access-l 101 permit tcp any any www -->www traffic to ISP1
access-l 101 permit tcp any any mail --> back up for mail packet to ISP2 down
access-l 102 permit tcp any any mail -->mail packet to ISP2
access-l 102 permit tcp any any www --> back up for www traffic go to ISP2
ip nat inside source list 101 interface s0 overload
ip nat inside source list 102 interface s1 overload
In this case is links of ISP1 and ISP2 are UP.
when you apply this acl on nat statement then nat will process each statement in order( if I incorrect please correct me) so mail traffics will match in this acl and then nat with ip of ISP1 only.
please advice solution about this
TIA

Hi,
If you have two serial links connecting to two diff service provider , then you can try this .
access-l 101 permit tcp any any www
access-l 102 permit tcp any any mail
route-map isp1 permit 10
match ip address 101
set interface s0
route-map isp2 permit 10
match ip address 102
set interface s1
ip nat inside route-map isp1 interface s0 overload
ip nat inside source route-map isp2 interface s1 overload
ip nat inside source list 103 interface s0 overload
ip nat inside source list 104 interface s1 overload
ip route 0.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 s0
ip route 0.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 s1 100
In case if any of the link fails , automatically the other traffic would prefer the other serial.
I have not tried the config , just worked out the config on logic .pls go through and try if possible
pls see the note2 column
http://www.cisco.com/en/US/tech/tk648/tk361/technologies_tech_note09186a0080093fca.shtml#related
Hope it helps
regards
vanesh k

Advice Requested - High Availability WITHOUT Failover Clustering

We're creating an entirely new Hyper-V virtualized environment on Server 2012 R2. My question is: Can we accomplish high availability WITHOUT using failover clustering?
So, I don't really have anything AGAINST failover clustering, and we will happily use it if it's the right solution for us, but to be honest, we really don't want ANYTHING to happen automatically when it comes to failover. Here's what I mean:
In this new environment, we have architected 2 identical, very capable Hyper-V physical hosts, each of which will run several VMs comprising the equivalent of a scaled-back version of our entire environment. In other words, there is at least a domain
controller, multiple web servers, and a (mirrored/HA/AlwaysOn) SQL Server 2012 VM running on each host, along with a few other miscellaneous one-off worker-bee VMs doing things like system monitoring. The SQL Server VM on each host has about 75% of the
physical memory resources dedicated to it (for performance reasons). We need pretty much the full horsepower of both machines up and going at all times under normal conditions.
So now, to high availability. The standard approach is to use failover clustering, but I am concerned that if these hosts are clustered, we'll have the equivalent of just 50% hardware capacity going at all times, with full failover in place of course
(we are using an iSCSI SAN for storage).
BUT, if these hosts are NOT clustered, and one of them is suddenly switched off, experiences some kind of catastrophic failure, or simply needs to be rebooted while applying WSUS patches, the SQL Server HA will fail over (so all databases will remain up
and going on the surviving VM), and the environment would continue functioning at somewhat reduced capacity until the failed host is restarted. With this approach, it seems to me that we would be running at 100% for the most part, and running at 50%
or so only in the event of a major failure, rather than running at 50% ALL the time.
Of course, in the event of a catastrophic failure, I'm also thinking that the one-off worker-bee VMs could be replicated to the alternate host so they could be started on the surviving host if needed during a long-term outage.
So basically, I am very interested in the thoughts of others with experience regarding taking this approach to Hyper-V architecture, as it seems as if failover clustering is almost a given when it comes to best practices and high availability. I guess
I'm looking for validation on my thinking.
So what do you think? What am I missing or forgetting? What will we LOSE if we go with a NON-clustered high-availability environment as I've described it?
Thanks in advance for your thoughts!

Udo -
Yes your responses are very helpful.
Can we use the built-in Server 2012 iSCSI Target Server role to convert the local RAID disks into an iSCSI LUN that the VMs could access? Or can that not run on the same physical box as the Hyper-V host? I guess if the physical box goes down
the LUN would go down anyway, huh? Or can I cluster that role (iSCSI target) as well? If not, do you have any other specific product suggestions I can research, or do I just end up wasting this 12TB of local disk storage?
- Morgan
That's a bad idea. First of all Microsoft iSCSI target is slow (it's non-cached @ server side). So if you really decided to use dedicated hardware for storage (maybe you do have a reason I don't know...) and if you're fine with your storage being a single
point of failure (OK, maybe your RTOs and RPOs are fair enough) then at least use SMB share. SMB at least does cache I/O on both client and server sides and also you can use Storage Spaces as a back end of it (non-clustered) so read "write back flash cache
for cheap". See:
What's new in iSCSI target with Windows Server 2012 R2
http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/library/dn305893.aspx
Improved optimization to allow disk-level caching
Updated
iSCSI Target Server now sets the disk cache bypass flag on a hosting disk I/O, through Force Unit Access (FUA), only when the issuing initiator explicitly requests it. This change can potentially improve performance.
Previously, iSCSI Target Server would always set the disk cache bypass flag on all I/O’s. System cache bypass functionality remains unchanged in iSCSI Target Server; for instance, the file system cache on the target server is always bypassed.
Yes you can cluster iSCSI target from Microsoft but a) it would be SLOW as there would be only active-passive I/O model (no real use from MPIO between multiple hosts) and b) that would require a shared storage for Windows Cluster. What for? Scenario was
usable with a) there was no virtual FC so guest VM cluster could not use FC LUs and b) there was no shared VHDX so SAS could not be used for guest VM cluster as well. Now both are present so scenario is useless: just export your existing shared storage without
any Microsoft iSCSI target and you'll be happy. For references see:
MSFT iSCSI Target in HA mode
http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/library/gg232621(v=ws.10).aspx
Cluster MSFT iSCSI Target with SAS back end
http://techontip.wordpress.com/2011/05/03/microsoft-iscsi-target-cluster-building-walkthrough/
Guest
VM Cluster Storage Options
http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/library/dn440540.aspx
Storage options
The following tables lists the storage types that you can use to provide shared storage for a guest cluster.
Storage Type
Description
Shared virtual hard disk
New in Windows Server 2012 R2, you can configure multiple virtual machines to connect to and use a single virtual hard disk (.vhdx) file. Each virtual machine can access the virtual hard disk just like servers
would connect to the same LUN in a storage area network (SAN). For more information, see Deploy a Guest Cluster Using a Shared Virtual Hard Disk.
Virtual Fibre Channel
Introduced in Windows Server 2012, virtual Fibre Channel enables you to connect virtual machines to LUNs on a Fibre Channel SAN. For more information, see Hyper-V
Virtual Fibre Channel Overview.
iSCSI
The iSCSI initiator inside a virtual machine enables you to connect over the network to an iSCSI target. For more information, see iSCSI
Target Block Storage Overviewand the blog post Introduction of iSCSI Target in Windows
Server 2012.
Storage requirements depend on the clustered roles that run on the cluster. Most clustered roles use clustered storage, where the storage is available on any cluster node that runs a clustered
role. Examples of clustered storage include Physical Disk resources and Cluster Shared Volumes (CSV). Some roles do not require storage that is managed by the cluster. For example, you can configure Microsoft SQL Server to use availability groups that replicate
the data between nodes. Other clustered roles may use Server Message Block (SMB) shares or Network File System (NFS) shares as data stores that any cluster node can access.
Sure you can use third-party software to replicate 12TB of your storage between just a pair of nodes to create a fully fault-tolerant cluster. See (there's also a free offering):
StarWind VSAN [Virtual SAN] for Hyper-V
http://www.starwindsoftware.com/native-san-for-hyper-v-free-edition
Product is similar to what VMware had just released for ESXi except it's selling for ~2 years so is mature :)
There are other guys doing this say DataCore (more playing for Windows-based FC) and SteelEye (more about geo-cluster & replication). But you may want to give them a try.
Hope this helped a bit :)
StarWind VSAN [Virtual SAN] clusters Hyper-V without SAS, Fibre Channel, SMB 3.0 or iSCSI, uses Ethernet to mirror internally mounted SATA disks between hosts.

RV042 Failover

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for