RHEL Engineering is moving the tracking of its product development work on RHEL 6 through RHEL 9 to Red Hat Jira (issues.redhat.com). If you're a Red Hat customer, please continue to file support cases via the Red Hat customer portal. If you're not, please head to the "RHEL project" in Red Hat Jira and file new tickets here. Individual Bugzilla bugs in the statuses "NEW", "ASSIGNED", and "POST" are being migrated throughout September 2023. Bugs of Red Hat partners with an assigned Engineering Partner Manager (EPM) are migrated in late September as per pre-agreed dates. Bugs against components "kernel", "kernel-rt", and "kpatch" are only migrated if still in "NEW" or "ASSIGNED". If you cannot log in to RH Jira, please consult article #7032570. That failing, please send an e-mail to the RH Jira admins at rh-issues@redhat.com to troubleshoot your issue as a user management inquiry. The email creates a ServiceNow ticket with Red Hat. Individual Bugzilla bugs that are migrated will be moved to status "CLOSED", resolution "MIGRATED", and set with "MigratedToJIRA" in "Keywords". The link to the successor Jira issue will be found under "Links", have a little "two-footprint" icon next to it, and direct you to the "RHEL project" in Red Hat Jira (issue links are of type "https://issues.redhat.com/browse/RHEL-XXXX", where "X" is a digit). This same link will be available in a blue banner at the top of the page informing you that that bug has been migrated.

Description of problem:

Generally looking into more asynchronous clustering, luci needs ways to handle multi site (asynchronous) clusters. One of the problems is that asynchronous cluster don't need any automatic failover but a most possible coherent config set for the cluster services, with some sets being "local" data and some being "global" data:
- service names etc (global definitions)
- node names (site specific)

see below conversation with pmyers:

> So ideally perhaps one could define an asynchronous site in cluster.conf
> just for the sake of configuration coherence.
> So e.g. the 3rd site node would just get config updates etc, but not
> take part in the synchronous cluster.
Well, config updates are generally site specific (i.e. hostnames of nodes
and of fence devices)  So not sure how useful this would be.

Perhaps luci functionality for defining a cluster and it's mirror, and
making it clearly defined what are site specific config options vs. common
(i.e. nodenames, fencing devices would be site specific.  service
definitions/failover domains could be common)

File an RFE bug against luci in RHEL6 bz on this please.

This request was evaluated by Red Hat Product Management for inclusion in a Red
Hat Enterprise Linux major release.  Product Management has requested further
review of this request by Red Hat Engineering, for potential inclusion in a Red
Hat Enterprise Linux Major release.  This request is not yet committed for
inclusion.

Configuration of clusters in stretch environments is limited to the use cases set forth in the linked Knowledge Base article; as such, the usefulness of this is limited.

Development Management has reviewed and declined this request.  You may appeal
this decision by reopening this request.