More of sanity check based on the product guide but can you confirm if my understanding is right. Apologies if this is confusing...
Datacentre 1 = Multiple prod MWGs + 1 x test MWG
Datacentre 2 = Multiple prod MWGs + 1 x test MWG
Datacentre 3 = 1 x prod MWGs
Prod traffic from Datacentre1 & Datacentre 2 is loadbalanced by BigIP
- Create Runtime group 'Prod' and associate all prod MWGs
- Create Update groups 'DC1', 'DC2' + 'DC3'
DC1 contains the multiple prod MWGs + test MWG from Datacentre 1
DC2 contains multiple prod MWGs + test MWG from Datacentre 2
DC3 contains single prod MWG from Datacentre 3
- Create Network group 'DC1' and associate prod MWGs from Datacentre 1
- Create Network group 'DC2' and associate prod MWGs from Datacentre 2
- Create Network group 'DC3' and associate prod MWG from Datacentre 3
- Create Network group Transit and add 1 prod MWG from each Datacentre
- All nodes are set to priority 10
At this stage changing the policy configuration on any prod node will push that configuration to remaining prod boxes. Is this correct?
If adding a new prod MWG to a Network group set its node priority value to 11. It will therefore get the policy configurations from an existing node and not try to push its
own settings even if its timestamp is newer. Is this correct?
- Create Runtime group 'Test' and associate all test MWGs
- Create a Network group 'Test' and associate test MWGs from Datacentre 1 + Datacentre 2
- Set nodes' priority to 50
At this stage prod policy configurations are not pushed to test MWGs. Test policy configuartions will be pushed between the test boxes. Is this correct?
If I wanted to bing the test policy configurations in-line with prod I would add one of the test MWGs to the Transit network group. That would allow the prod policy configuration
to be pushed to the test MWGs but because they have a lower priority (50) the test policy configuration will not be pushed to the prod MWGs if timestamp is newer. Is this correct?
Will this work if prod timestamp is older than test timestamp?
- It is not possible to create a master and site scenario as in V6 if greater than 2 MWGs as nodes with equal priority can overwrite each other. Is this correct?