<p>In red hat docs you may find some scenarios.</p>
<p>Your approach seems ok. The only question in my opinion is how big redundancy you need. Lets say that master1 fails. Is this situation problematic for your datacenter? If yes, then you should consider adding two more ldap servers. They can act as masters or as consumers - again depending on your needs.</p>
<p>Greg.</p>
<div class="gmail_quote">17 wrz 2012 17:05, "Kyle Flavin" <<a href="mailto:Kyle.Flavin@wb.com">Kyle.Flavin@wb.com</a>> napisał(a):<br type="attribution"><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
I'm looking to deploy 389 Directory in my environment to replace an<br>
existing iPlanet installation. I would be using it primarily to store<br>
user account data for authentication purposes. I have two physically<br>
separate data centers that I would like to share the same directory<br>
tree. My initial thinking is to setup 389 DS as follows:<br>
<br>
-A Master/Consumer in DataCenter A<br>
-A Master/Consumer in DataCenter B<br>
-Replication agreement between both masters, to mirror the directory<br>
tree in both environments.<br>
<br>
Does this sound like a reasonable approach? Is there a better way to do<br>
it? (ie: four masters?) Is there documentation for best practices when<br>
setting up 389 DS in situations such as this?<br>
<br>
Thanks.<br>
<br>
--<br>
389 users mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:389-users@lists.fedoraproject.org">389-users@lists.fedoraproject.org</a><br>
<a href="https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/389-users" target="_blank">https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/389-users</a></blockquote></div>