Multi-Subnet AlwaysOn: Is Routing and Remote Access always required?












1















Context



I'm setting up a 2-node AlwaysOn Availability Group (SQL Server 2017 Enterprise) with the following setup:




  • Existing DC+DNS (One NIC: 10.20.11.1/255.255.254.0)

  • New AG-Node1 (One NIC: 10.20.11.2/255.255.254.0)

  • New AG-Node2 (One NIC: 10.22.11.1/255.255.254.0)


I've read that this would be considered as an "AlwaysOn Multi-subnet" scenario (since nodes belong to different subnets).



Question:



Do I really have to treat this as an "AlwaysOn AG Multi subnet" even when all required routing is already implemented at networking device level and computers can all reach each other?



I've read that Routing and Remote Access is supposed to be deployed and configured but I do not get why this would be necessary since the routing is already implemented at networking device level.










share|improve this question

























  • Please add the subnet masks for the IPv4 addresses, otherwise it's possible those might all be on the same subnet.

    – Sean Gallardy
    8 hours ago











  • @SeanGallardy Added, thanks.

    – dsuy
    7 hours ago
















1















Context



I'm setting up a 2-node AlwaysOn Availability Group (SQL Server 2017 Enterprise) with the following setup:




  • Existing DC+DNS (One NIC: 10.20.11.1/255.255.254.0)

  • New AG-Node1 (One NIC: 10.20.11.2/255.255.254.0)

  • New AG-Node2 (One NIC: 10.22.11.1/255.255.254.0)


I've read that this would be considered as an "AlwaysOn Multi-subnet" scenario (since nodes belong to different subnets).



Question:



Do I really have to treat this as an "AlwaysOn AG Multi subnet" even when all required routing is already implemented at networking device level and computers can all reach each other?



I've read that Routing and Remote Access is supposed to be deployed and configured but I do not get why this would be necessary since the routing is already implemented at networking device level.










share|improve this question

























  • Please add the subnet masks for the IPv4 addresses, otherwise it's possible those might all be on the same subnet.

    – Sean Gallardy
    8 hours ago











  • @SeanGallardy Added, thanks.

    – dsuy
    7 hours ago














1












1








1








Context



I'm setting up a 2-node AlwaysOn Availability Group (SQL Server 2017 Enterprise) with the following setup:




  • Existing DC+DNS (One NIC: 10.20.11.1/255.255.254.0)

  • New AG-Node1 (One NIC: 10.20.11.2/255.255.254.0)

  • New AG-Node2 (One NIC: 10.22.11.1/255.255.254.0)


I've read that this would be considered as an "AlwaysOn Multi-subnet" scenario (since nodes belong to different subnets).



Question:



Do I really have to treat this as an "AlwaysOn AG Multi subnet" even when all required routing is already implemented at networking device level and computers can all reach each other?



I've read that Routing and Remote Access is supposed to be deployed and configured but I do not get why this would be necessary since the routing is already implemented at networking device level.










share|improve this question
















Context



I'm setting up a 2-node AlwaysOn Availability Group (SQL Server 2017 Enterprise) with the following setup:




  • Existing DC+DNS (One NIC: 10.20.11.1/255.255.254.0)

  • New AG-Node1 (One NIC: 10.20.11.2/255.255.254.0)

  • New AG-Node2 (One NIC: 10.22.11.1/255.255.254.0)


I've read that this would be considered as an "AlwaysOn Multi-subnet" scenario (since nodes belong to different subnets).



Question:



Do I really have to treat this as an "AlwaysOn AG Multi subnet" even when all required routing is already implemented at networking device level and computers can all reach each other?



I've read that Routing and Remote Access is supposed to be deployed and configured but I do not get why this would be necessary since the routing is already implemented at networking device level.







sql-server availability-groups network






share|improve this question















share|improve this question













share|improve this question




share|improve this question








edited 3 hours ago









Tony Hinkle

2,4901422




2,4901422










asked 8 hours ago









dsuydsuy

162




162













  • Please add the subnet masks for the IPv4 addresses, otherwise it's possible those might all be on the same subnet.

    – Sean Gallardy
    8 hours ago











  • @SeanGallardy Added, thanks.

    – dsuy
    7 hours ago



















  • Please add the subnet masks for the IPv4 addresses, otherwise it's possible those might all be on the same subnet.

    – Sean Gallardy
    8 hours ago











  • @SeanGallardy Added, thanks.

    – dsuy
    7 hours ago

















Please add the subnet masks for the IPv4 addresses, otherwise it's possible those might all be on the same subnet.

– Sean Gallardy
8 hours ago





Please add the subnet masks for the IPv4 addresses, otherwise it's possible those might all be on the same subnet.

– Sean Gallardy
8 hours ago













@SeanGallardy Added, thanks.

– dsuy
7 hours ago





@SeanGallardy Added, thanks.

– dsuy
7 hours ago










1 Answer
1






active

oldest

votes


















3















Do I really have to treat this as an "AlwaysOn AG Multi subnet" even when all required routing is already implemented at networking device level and computers can all reach each other?




Yes. SQL Server isn't doing any "routing" at the network level, it's not a layer-3 device... However, if you don't treat it as a "multi-subnet cluster" then you can get yourself into some time-out causing situations. While the situations are easily rectifiable, why not save the trouble and set everything up the first time, then not have to go back and change things?




I've read that Routing and Remote Access is supposed to be deployed and configured but I do not get why this would be necessary since the routing is already implemented at networking device level.




I don't know why someone is telling you to setup RRAS... unless it's for some local repro environment, such as the one on my laptop that doesn't have any routing devices as it's all internal virtual machines. This doesn't make any sense unless you're using RRAS as the routing device (software router).



Either way, this is all network design and has nothing specifically to do with SQL Server.






share|improve this answer























    Your Answer








    StackExchange.ready(function() {
    var channelOptions = {
    tags: "".split(" "),
    id: "182"
    };
    initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

    StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
    // Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
    if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
    StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
    createEditor();
    });
    }
    else {
    createEditor();
    }
    });

    function createEditor() {
    StackExchange.prepareEditor({
    heartbeatType: 'answer',
    autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
    convertImagesToLinks: false,
    noModals: true,
    showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
    reputationToPostImages: null,
    bindNavPrevention: true,
    postfix: "",
    imageUploader: {
    brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
    contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
    allowUrls: true
    },
    onDemand: true,
    discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
    ,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
    });


    }
    });














    draft saved

    draft discarded


















    StackExchange.ready(
    function () {
    StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fdba.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f230171%2fmulti-subnet-alwayson-is-routing-and-remote-access-always-required%23new-answer', 'question_page');
    }
    );

    Post as a guest















    Required, but never shown

























    1 Answer
    1






    active

    oldest

    votes








    1 Answer
    1






    active

    oldest

    votes









    active

    oldest

    votes






    active

    oldest

    votes









    3















    Do I really have to treat this as an "AlwaysOn AG Multi subnet" even when all required routing is already implemented at networking device level and computers can all reach each other?




    Yes. SQL Server isn't doing any "routing" at the network level, it's not a layer-3 device... However, if you don't treat it as a "multi-subnet cluster" then you can get yourself into some time-out causing situations. While the situations are easily rectifiable, why not save the trouble and set everything up the first time, then not have to go back and change things?




    I've read that Routing and Remote Access is supposed to be deployed and configured but I do not get why this would be necessary since the routing is already implemented at networking device level.




    I don't know why someone is telling you to setup RRAS... unless it's for some local repro environment, such as the one on my laptop that doesn't have any routing devices as it's all internal virtual machines. This doesn't make any sense unless you're using RRAS as the routing device (software router).



    Either way, this is all network design and has nothing specifically to do with SQL Server.






    share|improve this answer




























      3















      Do I really have to treat this as an "AlwaysOn AG Multi subnet" even when all required routing is already implemented at networking device level and computers can all reach each other?




      Yes. SQL Server isn't doing any "routing" at the network level, it's not a layer-3 device... However, if you don't treat it as a "multi-subnet cluster" then you can get yourself into some time-out causing situations. While the situations are easily rectifiable, why not save the trouble and set everything up the first time, then not have to go back and change things?




      I've read that Routing and Remote Access is supposed to be deployed and configured but I do not get why this would be necessary since the routing is already implemented at networking device level.




      I don't know why someone is telling you to setup RRAS... unless it's for some local repro environment, such as the one on my laptop that doesn't have any routing devices as it's all internal virtual machines. This doesn't make any sense unless you're using RRAS as the routing device (software router).



      Either way, this is all network design and has nothing specifically to do with SQL Server.






      share|improve this answer


























        3












        3








        3








        Do I really have to treat this as an "AlwaysOn AG Multi subnet" even when all required routing is already implemented at networking device level and computers can all reach each other?




        Yes. SQL Server isn't doing any "routing" at the network level, it's not a layer-3 device... However, if you don't treat it as a "multi-subnet cluster" then you can get yourself into some time-out causing situations. While the situations are easily rectifiable, why not save the trouble and set everything up the first time, then not have to go back and change things?




        I've read that Routing and Remote Access is supposed to be deployed and configured but I do not get why this would be necessary since the routing is already implemented at networking device level.




        I don't know why someone is telling you to setup RRAS... unless it's for some local repro environment, such as the one on my laptop that doesn't have any routing devices as it's all internal virtual machines. This doesn't make any sense unless you're using RRAS as the routing device (software router).



        Either way, this is all network design and has nothing specifically to do with SQL Server.






        share|improve this answer














        Do I really have to treat this as an "AlwaysOn AG Multi subnet" even when all required routing is already implemented at networking device level and computers can all reach each other?




        Yes. SQL Server isn't doing any "routing" at the network level, it's not a layer-3 device... However, if you don't treat it as a "multi-subnet cluster" then you can get yourself into some time-out causing situations. While the situations are easily rectifiable, why not save the trouble and set everything up the first time, then not have to go back and change things?




        I've read that Routing and Remote Access is supposed to be deployed and configured but I do not get why this would be necessary since the routing is already implemented at networking device level.




        I don't know why someone is telling you to setup RRAS... unless it's for some local repro environment, such as the one on my laptop that doesn't have any routing devices as it's all internal virtual machines. This doesn't make any sense unless you're using RRAS as the routing device (software router).



        Either way, this is all network design and has nothing specifically to do with SQL Server.







        share|improve this answer












        share|improve this answer



        share|improve this answer










        answered 7 hours ago









        Sean GallardySean Gallardy

        16k22548




        16k22548






























            draft saved

            draft discarded




















































            Thanks for contributing an answer to Database Administrators Stack Exchange!


            • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

            But avoid



            • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

            • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.


            To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.




            draft saved


            draft discarded














            StackExchange.ready(
            function () {
            StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fdba.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f230171%2fmulti-subnet-alwayson-is-routing-and-remote-access-always-required%23new-answer', 'question_page');
            }
            );

            Post as a guest















            Required, but never shown





















































            Required, but never shown














            Required, but never shown












            Required, but never shown







            Required, but never shown

































            Required, but never shown














            Required, but never shown












            Required, but never shown







            Required, but never shown







            Popular posts from this blog

            CARDNET

            Boot-repair Failure: Unable to locate package grub-common:i386

            濃尾地震