Den fre 18 okt. 2024 kl 00:47 skrev Robert Keizer <robert@keizer.ca>:
> I'm wondering what others think.
> I would like to run OpenBSD on 3 hosts and have systems such as pfsync
> and sasync operate in quorum mode (2/3). The ideal implementation
> would be to block until 3/3 or a timeout AND 2/3 nodes respond.

This sounds weird to me, the carp system would make the clients get a
response as long as 1/3 hosts are up, so from the outside you would
not know if one, two or three hosts are up and available, you would
only notice if zero hosts are responding. From the "inside", if you
configure carp with different advskew settings you would know if the
1st, 2nd or 3rd preferred host is taking on the traffic, and then run
programs or scripts to alert or otherwise "handle" the situation you
are in if not on the 1st host.

> Are these types of patches to pfsync, sasync, and carp, of interest to
> others?  Effectively I want to know if I should bother to attempt to
> make these systems work in this way and upstream the changes.
> I can solve my own issues in other ways, but I would like to confirm
> whether there is also interest from others around this functionality.

So, as long as at least one host is there to handle the pf and ipsec
SA stuff, and you can alert on downed carp members, what else is there
to "vote" on using a quorum?

-- 
May the most significant bit of your life be positive.