Send dhcp-users mailing list submissions to
dhcp-users@lists.isc.org
To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
https://lists.isc.org/mailman/listinfo/dhcp-users
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
dhcp-users-requ...@lists.isc.org
You can reach the person managing the list at
dhcp-users-ow...@lists.isc.org
When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
than "Re: Contents of dhcp-users digest..."
Today's Topics:
1. failover partner state time in dhcpd.leases (?????)
2. Re: failover partner state time in dhcpd.leases
(sth...@nethelp.no)
3. Re: failover partner state time in dhcpd.leases (?????)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Message: 1
Date: Tue, 13 Sep 2016 16:52:25 +0900
From: ????? <shintaro.fujiw...@miraclelinux.com>
To: dhcp-users@lists.isc.org
Subject: failover partner state time in dhcpd.leases
Message-ID:
<cac7kcperd0e+rvqny5g3fzekg2st_9v7eeouf7dxueweh4u...@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Hi, I'm using isc-dhcp-V3.0.5-RedHat.
I apply auto-partner down patch for 5 secs.
I don't understand why in failover mode, I get same time as it started
in dhcpd.leases as partner state.
I tested like this.
start seconday
start primay
In primary log, I get,
failover peer "test" state {
my state recover at 2 2016/09/13 05:28:41;
partner state unknown-state at 2 2016/09/13 05:28:41;
}
...(snip)...
failover peer "test" state {
my state normal at 2 2016/09/13 05:28:42;
partner state normal at 2 2016/09/13 05:28:41;
}
This, I understand but, when I do secondary down,
failover peer "test" state {
my state communications-interrupted at 2 2016/09/13 05:32:23;
partner state normal at 2 2016/09/13 05:28:41;
}
...(snip)...
? did up and down secondary but I always get same date as it started.
=====================================
partner state normal at 2 2016/09/13 05:28:41;
=====================================
And, when dhcpd.leases moved to dhcpd.leases~, I still get same date
in new dhcpd.leases file
in the first place.
My question Is, is this OK and why is it ?
Great thanks in advance!
Shintaro
------------------------------
Message: 2
Date: Tue, 13 Sep 2016 11:40:30 +0200 (CEST)
From: sth...@nethelp.no
To: dhcp-users@lists.isc.org, shintaro.fujiw...@miraclelinux.com
Subject: Re: failover partner state time in dhcpd.leases
Message-ID: <20160913.114030.74711474.sth...@nethelp.no>
Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=us-ascii
> Hi, I'm using isc-dhcp-V3.0.5-RedHat.
> I apply auto-partner down patch for 5 secs.
>
> I don't understand why in failover mode, I get same time as it started
> in dhcpd.leases as partner state.
You're using a *very* old version of ISC DHCP, which hasn't been
supported for many years. There are *lots* of bug fixes for the
failover functionality in newer releases.
I strongly recommend simply upgrading to a newer release. Please
note that 3.0.5 is *not* interoperable with newer versions (so you
cannot run a 3.0.5 server as part of a failover pair where the
other server is 3.1.x or newer).
Steinar Haug, Nethelp consulting, sth...@nethelp.no
------------------------------
Message: 3
Date: Tue, 13 Sep 2016 19:11:57 +0900
From: ????? <shintaro.fujiw...@miraclelinux.com>
To: sth...@nethelp.no
Cc: dhcp-users@lists.isc.org
Subject: Re: failover partner state time in dhcpd.leases
Message-ID:
<CAC7kcpEYs=1es-Fo9bwaPA2=-Y=fumdsse8s8p+5dps2nto...@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Thank you very much, Steinar, I appreciate your fast reply.
I also tested in v4.1 environment, but result was the same.
Is this what it should be?
If so, why is it?
Because this is the partner-stos?
Thanks in advance.
Shintaro
2016-09-13 18:40 GMT+09:00 <sth...@nethelp.no>:
>> Hi, I'm using isc-dhcp-V3.0.5-RedHat.
>> I apply auto-partner down patch for 5 secs.
>>
>> I don't understand why in failover mode, I get same time as it started
>> in dhcpd.leases as partner state.
>
> You're using a *very* old version of ISC DHCP, which hasn't been
> supported for many years. There are *lots* of bug fixes for the
> failover functionality in newer releases.
>
> I strongly recommend simply upgrading to a newer release. Please
> note that 3.0.5 is *not* interoperable with newer versions (so you
> cannot run a 3.0.5 server as part of a failover pair where the
> other server is 3.1.x or newer).
>
> Steinar Haug, Nethelp consulting, sth...@nethelp.no
------------------------------
Subject: Digest Footer
_______________________________________________
dhcp-users mailing list
dhcp-users@lists.isc.org
https://lists.isc.org/mailman/listinfo/dhcp-users
------------------------------
End of dhcp-users Digest, Vol 95, Issue 3
*****************************************
