[asterisk-users] [Asterisk-users] asterisk +heartbeat

[Steve Totaro]

On Thu, Oct 16, 2008 at 1:09 PM, Wilton Helm <whelm at compuserve.com> wrote:
>> having two NICs on the same subnet
>
> I'm trying to wrap my brain around that in the larger network picture.  Two
> NICs in the same subnet (presumably on the same computer) would have access
> to the same other devices.  This could potentially increase bandwidth
> (maybe?) and offer redundancy (if NICS, wiring or switches were the biggest
> source of failure).  I'm not sure how the OS would decide which one to use
> for a given packet, or if an application (such as Asterisk) could determine
> which one to use.  I can see potential problems with addressing, as other
> devices could send to one, and would definitely not know what to do with a
> reply from the other, etc.  I'm not sure this would be an Asterisk bug.
> Without some concept of what I am missing here, I would consider it a
> cockpit error on system setup.  The only reason I can think of for having
> two NICs in a computer would be using it as a router--in which case they
> wouldn't be on the same subnet.  (OK I've done it before for redundant
> paths, but again, the paths should be on different subnets, otherwise how
> does one tell the OS which path was intended?)
>
> Wilton
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> -- Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com --
>
> asterisk-users mailing list
> To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit:
>   http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
>

If you are referring to my post about strange behavior of asterisk
sending on one NIC and receiving on another.  This could be a useful
feature but I think it was a bug and caused issues.

The phone is programmed with the IP of the NIC to use, so it should
send packets there, Asterisk should send packets back out the same NIC
that they came in on (in case, all LAN, server and phones).

The path should be determined by IP and or MAC address.  I would
definitely call it a bug.

Increased bandwidth is nice but in a world of cheap gigabit switches
and servers with standard dual gigabit NICs, I don' see a huge need.

I have dual homed servers on the same subnet in case a NIC or switch
died, by plugging into different switches.  I have also done this
(although not necessary) with Quintum boxes, register four 24 port FXS
boxes to one NIC and four to the secondary.

With STP http://www.cisco.com/univercd/cc/td/doc/product/rtrmgmt/sw_ntman/cwsimain/cwsi2/cwsiug2/vlan2/stpapp.htm
You can mesh your network without worrying about packet storms.

-- 
Thanks,
Steve Totaro
+18887771888 (Toll Free)
+12409381212 (Cell)
+12024369784 (Skype)