On Tue, Jun 11, 2019 at 2:54 PM Karim Bourenane karim.bourenane@gmail.com wrote:
Thanks François, for your reply.
The goal, is to have the service IPA available always, if the server 1 will be down, and also for load sharing.
Load-balancing is normally done automatically by servers/replicas and clients.
If you'd like having a single point of entry for administrative workloads https://www.adelton.com/freeipa/freeipa-behind-load-balancer should work as-is but you will need a HTTP proxy machine in front of your FreeIPA servers.
I thought about roundrobin dns, but sharing service is not mastered for effective sharing and the life test is not present.
Bien à vous
Mr Karim Bourenane +33686464439 +32493866354
Le mar. 11 juin 2019 à 14:03, François Cami fcami@redhat.com a écrit :
Hi Karim,
On Tue, Jun 11, 2019 at 1:56 PM Karim Bourenane via FreeIPA-users freeipa-users@lists.fedorahosted.org wrote:
Hello team
Hope you are well.
After an existing installation, we decide to implement a Haproxy + Keepalive in all our IPA's servers.
The haproxy / keepalive work weel but now the IPA doent run weel, because he want to listen on all interface in the servers.
Ho i can to modify the IPA (+ all modules KRB5/DNS...) conf server, to bind only in 1 local interface and not to the VIP interface ?
Binding to the local interface is in no way expected and will result in some components not working.
I am not aware of any scenario where adding HAProxy+Keepalived in front of FreeIPA would provide a tangible benefit. Could you please explain the reasoning behind such a decision?
Regards, François
King regard _______________________________________________ FreeIPA-users mailing list -- freeipa-users@lists.fedorahosted.org To unsubscribe send an email to freeipa-users-leave@lists.fedorahosted.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedorahosted.org/archives/list/freeipa-users@lists.fedorahoste...