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. Peer rebalancing problems (Norman Elton)
2. Re: Peer rebalancing problems (Norman Elton)
3. Re: Peer rebalancing problems (Bob Harold)
4. Re: Peer rebalancing problems (Norman Elton)
5. Re: Peer rebalancing problems (Bob Harold)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Message: 1
Date: Tue, 3 Sep 2019 15:41:38 -0400
From: Norman Elton <normel...@gmail.com>
To: Users of ISC DHCP <dhcp-users@lists.isc.org>
Subject: Peer rebalancing problems
Message-ID:
<CAPCnwUeE4aEMDF=ycph0cnlbez_bptx7r_xepi5uxqh6ap1...@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
I've seen references to this in previous posts, but no clear
resolution. I've got two RHEL6 boxes (dhcp-4.1.1-63.P1.el6_10) setup
in a failover pair. I discovered this morning that one server was
stuck in "communications-interrupted" state. Turns out there were two
dhcpd processes running simultaneously. Not sure how that happened,
but shockingly, it wasn't happy.
I've restarted both servers, we're back in normal failover state. But
one of my subnets is still not balancing out:
landlord01: balancing pool 55814b7e0ad0 WIRELESS-FACSTAFF total 2970
free 58 backup 320 lts -131 max-own (+/-)38
landlord01: balanced pool 55814b7e0ad0 WIRELESS-FACSTAFF total 2970
free 58 backup 320 lts -131 max-misbal 57
landlord02: balancing pool 55d8e05a4aa0 WIRELESS-FACSTAFF total 2970
free 353 backup 0 lts -176 max-own (+/-)35 (requesting peer
rebalance!)
landlord02: balanced pool 55d8e05a4aa0 WIRELESS-FACSTAFF total 2970
free 353 backup 0 lts -176 max-misbal 53
It seems a little strange that both servers have a negative LTS value.
And that they're so different. Is this explainable somehow?
Thanks,
Norman
------------------------------
Message: 2
Date: Tue, 3 Sep 2019 15:44:27 -0400
From: Norman Elton <normel...@gmail.com>
To: Users of ISC DHCP <dhcp-users@lists.isc.org>
Subject: Re: Peer rebalancing problems
Message-ID:
<CAPCnwUf43XW4chUNHwp4Ea0Dqr3FpYh=myaaubznmt7dpzt...@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Sorry, I just discovered this nugget:
landlord01: peer wm-dhcp-01-02: Got POOLREQ, answering negatively!
Peer may be out of leases or database inconsistent.
I will start googling and post if I discover anything.
Thanks,
Norman
On Tue, Sep 3, 2019 at 3:41 PM Norman Elton <normel...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> I've seen references to this in previous posts, but no clear
> resolution. I've got two RHEL6 boxes (dhcp-4.1.1-63.P1.el6_10) setup
> in a failover pair. I discovered this morning that one server was
> stuck in "communications-interrupted" state. Turns out there were two
> dhcpd processes running simultaneously. Not sure how that happened,
> but shockingly, it wasn't happy.
>
> I've restarted both servers, we're back in normal failover state. But
> one of my subnets is still not balancing out:
>
> landlord01: balancing pool 55814b7e0ad0 WIRELESS-FACSTAFF total 2970
> free 58 backup 320 lts -131 max-own (+/-)38
> landlord01: balanced pool 55814b7e0ad0 WIRELESS-FACSTAFF total 2970
> free 58 backup 320 lts -131 max-misbal 57
> landlord02: balancing pool 55d8e05a4aa0 WIRELESS-FACSTAFF total 2970
> free 353 backup 0 lts -176 max-own (+/-)35 (requesting peer
> rebalance!)
> landlord02: balanced pool 55d8e05a4aa0 WIRELESS-FACSTAFF total 2970
> free 353 backup 0 lts -176 max-misbal 53
>
> It seems a little strange that both servers have a negative LTS value.
> And that they're so different. Is this explainable somehow?
>
> Thanks,
>
> Norman
------------------------------
Message: 3
Date: Tue, 3 Sep 2019 16:02:26 -0400
From: Bob Harold <rharo...@umich.edu>
To: Users of ISC DHCP <dhcp-users@lists.isc.org>
Subject: Re: Peer rebalancing problems
Message-ID:
<ca+nkc8arfsfinyz4sbqfwoxhgxny-6yhtf+kbbpu9auxztt...@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
I remove the subnet from failover, so it only has one DHCP server, then
after the servers settle, add failover back in. It is a pain, but I have
not found a better solution.
--
Bob Harold
On Tue, Sep 3, 2019 at 3:44 PM Norman Elton <normel...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Sorry, I just discovered this nugget:
>
> landlord01: peer wm-dhcp-01-02: Got POOLREQ, answering negatively!
> Peer may be out of leases or database inconsistent.
>
> I will start googling and post if I discover anything.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Norman
>
> On Tue, Sep 3, 2019 at 3:41 PM Norman Elton <normel...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > I've seen references to this in previous posts, but no clear
> > resolution. I've got two RHEL6 boxes (dhcp-4.1.1-63.P1.el6_10) setup
> > in a failover pair. I discovered this morning that one server was
> > stuck in "communications-interrupted" state. Turns out there were two
> > dhcpd processes running simultaneously. Not sure how that happened,
> > but shockingly, it wasn't happy.
> >
> > I've restarted both servers, we're back in normal failover state. But
> > one of my subnets is still not balancing out:
> >
> > landlord01: balancing pool 55814b7e0ad0 WIRELESS-FACSTAFF total 2970
> > free 58 backup 320 lts -131 max-own (+/-)38
> > landlord01: balanced pool 55814b7e0ad0 WIRELESS-FACSTAFF total 2970
> > free 58 backup 320 lts -131 max-misbal 57
> > landlord02: balancing pool 55d8e05a4aa0 WIRELESS-FACSTAFF total 2970
> > free 353 backup 0 lts -176 max-own (+/-)35 (requesting peer
> > rebalance!)
> > landlord02: balanced pool 55d8e05a4aa0 WIRELESS-FACSTAFF total 2970
> > free 353 backup 0 lts -176 max-misbal 53
> >
> > It seems a little strange that both servers have a negative LTS value.
> > And that they're so different. Is this explainable somehow?
> >
> > Thanks,
> >
> > Norman
> _______________________________________________
> dhcp-users mailing list
> dhcp-users@lists.isc.org
> https://lists.isc.org/mailman/listinfo/dhcp-users
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
<https://lists.isc.org/pipermail/dhcp-users/attachments/20190903/8b11f59e/attachment-0001.html>
------------------------------
Message: 4
Date: Tue, 3 Sep 2019 16:07:57 -0400
From: Norman Elton <normel...@gmail.com>
To: Users of ISC DHCP <dhcp-users@lists.isc.org>
Subject: Re: Peer rebalancing problems
Message-ID:
<capcnwudj2v1i3d-gmfs_rmpdypd4nzmnmd_ny51rv-zr-vj...@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Just to confirm ... remove the failover declaration from one server,
and the entire subnet from the other server?
Norman
On Tue, Sep 3, 2019 at 4:02 PM Bob Harold <rharo...@umich.edu> wrote:
>
> I remove the subnet from failover, so it only has one DHCP server, then after
> the servers settle, add failover back in. It is a pain, but I have not found
> a better solution.
>
> --
> Bob Harold
>
>
>
> On Tue, Sep 3, 2019 at 3:44 PM Norman Elton <normel...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> Sorry, I just discovered this nugget:
>>
>> landlord01: peer wm-dhcp-01-02: Got POOLREQ, answering negatively!
>> Peer may be out of leases or database inconsistent.
>>
>> I will start googling and post if I discover anything.
>>
>> Thanks,
>>
>> Norman
>>
>> On Tue, Sep 3, 2019 at 3:41 PM Norman Elton <normel...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >
>> > I've seen references to this in previous posts, but no clear
>> > resolution. I've got two RHEL6 boxes (dhcp-4.1.1-63.P1.el6_10) setup
>> > in a failover pair. I discovered this morning that one server was
>> > stuck in "communications-interrupted" state. Turns out there were two
>> > dhcpd processes running simultaneously. Not sure how that happened,
>> > but shockingly, it wasn't happy.
>> >
>> > I've restarted both servers, we're back in normal failover state. But
>> > one of my subnets is still not balancing out:
>> >
>> > landlord01: balancing pool 55814b7e0ad0 WIRELESS-FACSTAFF total 2970
>> > free 58 backup 320 lts -131 max-own (+/-)38
>> > landlord01: balanced pool 55814b7e0ad0 WIRELESS-FACSTAFF total 2970
>> > free 58 backup 320 lts -131 max-misbal 57
>> > landlord02: balancing pool 55d8e05a4aa0 WIRELESS-FACSTAFF total 2970
>> > free 353 backup 0 lts -176 max-own (+/-)35 (requesting peer
>> > rebalance!)
>> > landlord02: balanced pool 55d8e05a4aa0 WIRELESS-FACSTAFF total 2970
>> > free 353 backup 0 lts -176 max-misbal 53
>> >
>> > It seems a little strange that both servers have a negative LTS value.
>> > And that they're so different. Is this explainable somehow?
>> >
>> > Thanks,
>> >
>> > Norman
>> _______________________________________________
>> dhcp-users mailing list
>> dhcp-users@lists.isc.org
>> https://lists.isc.org/mailman/listinfo/dhcp-users
>
> _______________________________________________
> dhcp-users mailing list
> dhcp-users@lists.isc.org
> https://lists.isc.org/mailman/listinfo/dhcp-users
------------------------------
Message: 5
Date: Tue, 3 Sep 2019 16:19:43 -0400
From: Bob Harold <rharo...@umich.edu>
To: Users of ISC DHCP <dhcp-users@lists.isc.org>
Subject: Re: Peer rebalancing problems
Message-ID:
<CA+nkc8CvWv2_FiRpDpH-k2WHZhXErHc6E5AfGmS=uuv62ki...@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Yes. (I use a managed solution from BlueCat Networks, but I assume that is
what it does under the covers.)
--
Bob Harold
On Tue, Sep 3, 2019 at 4:08 PM Norman Elton <normel...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Just to confirm ... remove the failover declaration from one server,
> and the entire subnet from the other server?
>
> Norman
>
> On Tue, Sep 3, 2019 at 4:02 PM Bob Harold <rharo...@umich.edu> wrote:
> >
> > I remove the subnet from failover, so it only has one DHCP server, then
> after the servers settle, add failover back in. It is a pain, but I have
> not found a better solution.
> >
> > --
> > Bob Harold
> >
> >
> >
> > On Tue, Sep 3, 2019 at 3:44 PM Norman Elton <normel...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> Sorry, I just discovered this nugget:
> >>
> >> landlord01: peer wm-dhcp-01-02: Got POOLREQ, answering negatively!
> >> Peer may be out of leases or database inconsistent.
> >>
> >> I will start googling and post if I discover anything.
> >>
> >> Thanks,
> >>
> >> Norman
> >>
> >> On Tue, Sep 3, 2019 at 3:41 PM Norman Elton <normel...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >> >
> >> > I've seen references to this in previous posts, but no clear
> >> > resolution. I've got two RHEL6 boxes (dhcp-4.1.1-63.P1.el6_10) setup
> >> > in a failover pair. I discovered this morning that one server was
> >> > stuck in "communications-interrupted" state. Turns out there were two
> >> > dhcpd processes running simultaneously. Not sure how that happened,
> >> > but shockingly, it wasn't happy.
> >> >
> >> > I've restarted both servers, we're back in normal failover state. But
> >> > one of my subnets is still not balancing out:
> >> >
> >> > landlord01: balancing pool 55814b7e0ad0 WIRELESS-FACSTAFF total 2970
> >> > free 58 backup 320 lts -131 max-own (+/-)38
> >> > landlord01: balanced pool 55814b7e0ad0 WIRELESS-FACSTAFF total 2970
> >> > free 58 backup 320 lts -131 max-misbal 57
> >> > landlord02: balancing pool 55d8e05a4aa0 WIRELESS-FACSTAFF total 2970
> >> > free 353 backup 0 lts -176 max-own (+/-)35 (requesting peer
> >> > rebalance!)
> >> > landlord02: balanced pool 55d8e05a4aa0 WIRELESS-FACSTAFF total 2970
> >> > free 353 backup 0 lts -176 max-misbal 53
> >> >
> >> > It seems a little strange that both servers have a negative LTS value.
> >> > And that they're so different. Is this explainable somehow?
> >> >
> >> > Thanks,
> >> >
> >> > Norman
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> dhcp-users mailing list
> >> dhcp-users@lists.isc.org
> >> https://lists.isc.org/mailman/listinfo/dhcp-users
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > dhcp-users mailing list
> > dhcp-users@lists.isc.org
> > https://lists.isc.org/mailman/listinfo/dhcp-users
> _______________________________________________
> dhcp-users mailing list
> dhcp-users@lists.isc.org
> https://lists.isc.org/mailman/listinfo/dhcp-users
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
<https://lists.isc.org/pipermail/dhcp-users/attachments/20190903/980a89dd/attachment.html>
------------------------------
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 131, Issue 2
******************************************
