Michael DeHaan wrote: > Just recently on IRC (join #cobbler on irc.freenode.net if you aren't > there already) we were discussing whether we could use Cobbler's concept > of interfaces to describe more complicated setups and then use a Cobbler > snippet called in %post to set everything up. > > We initially were thinking we could describe an interface like this: > > cobbler system edit --name=foo --interface=1 --bond-group=asdf > --bond-opts="a=1 b=2 ..." --bond-alias="..." > cobbler system edit --name=foo --interface=2 --bond-group=asdf > --bond-opts="a=2 b=3 ..." --bond-alias="..." > The problem with this is that the bonding options are a property of the resulting bonding interface asdf, and should be the same for both interfaces. I'm not sure where we'd want to store those options.
> And the %post section snippet (this would be new) would insure that the > order of NICs booted is the same as those installed and everything is > configured. This would also set up things that Anaconda could not set up. > > In the above example, eth1 and eth2 would be bonded as "asdf". > > In the above proposal, I'd be willing to add the bits to Cobbler to > store the above kind of data, though I'd like for someone with more > networking skills to write the network configuration snippet. > I can do that. It probably wouldn't be much more than reusing bits of my existing snippets. :) > We also talked a bit about IP "aliases" / VIPs and bridging. I will > admit at this point that networking is /not/ my area, so what are > everyone's thoughts to the implementation of the above? > Hmm, this would be a fairly complex network topology for cobbler. I think VIPs would be doable (just add a list of aliases to an interface), but briding-setups are very specific to the user's situation. > What fields do we need to store to make this all possible to be defined > at provisioning time and "just work"? > To eliminate the possibility of different bonding options specified on two slaves of the same bond, we'd need a special bonding configuration object (but this might be ugly). This bonding object would contain the bonding options and the IP-configuration. Per interface we need a field "bonding master", to link the interface to this bonding object. We'd want a checkbox for hotplug as well. This defaults to ON, but there's a bug with bonding + VLANs and hotplug. (https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=442339) Or we should just disable it by default. Per interface we'd also need a list of virtual IPs. Jasper _______________________________________________ cobbler mailing list [email protected] https://fedorahosted.org/mailman/listinfo/cobbler
