Alan Robertson wrote:
> Terry L. Inzauro wrote:
>> Andrew Beekhof wrote:
>>> On 4/11/07, Terry L. Inzauro <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>>> list,
>>>>
>>>> this is a continuation of another thread that was started a few weeks
>>>> back. the original thread was
>>>> started in regards
>>>> to the setup of pingd. this thread is in regards to pingd not being
>>>> able to start for whatever
>>>> reason and i suspect my resource
>>>> groups are not starting as a result ;(
>>>>
>>>> a little background:
>>>>
>>>> - two resource groups are defined. i want to split the two resource
>>>> groups between nodes when both
>>>> nodes are online. if both
>>>> nodes are not online, then obviously, fail the resource resource group
>>>> to the other available node.
>>>> - pingd configuration was previously verified correct by Alan R.
>>>> - crm_verify passes
>>>> - BasicSanityCheck 'does not pass' (fails on pingd checks)
>>> pingd isn't failing...
>>>
>>> Apr 11 12:44:07 roxetta CTS: BadNews: heartbeat[13770]:
>>> 2007/04/11_12:44:05 ERROR: glib: Error sending packet: Operation not
>>> permitted
>>> Apr 11 12:44:07 roxetta CTS: BadNews: heartbeat[13770]:
>>> 2007/04/11_12:44:05 ERROR: write failure on ping 127.0.0.1.: Operation
>>> not permitted
>>>
>>> these messages are from the heartbeat communications layer - and if
>>> thats not working, then pingd has no hope at all.
>>>
>>> i have no idea why pinging localhost should fail - firewall?
>>>
>>>> - without pingd, the resource groups function as expected
>>>> - heartbeat has been restarted
>>>> - heartbeat hangs on stopping so i do the following ;)
>>>> for i in `ps -ef | grep heart | awk '{print $2}'`; do kill
>>>> $i; done
>>>>
>>>> i have noticed log entries in the log file that are obviously related
>>>> to pingd. this however 'may'
>>>> not be the case.
>>>> would anyone be interested in lending a hand?
>>>>
>>>> heartbeat version = 2.0.8-r2
>>>> OS = gentoo 2006.1
>>>> kernel = 2.6.18 (i have tested both hardened<with grsecurity and pax>
>>>> as well as generic)
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> cibadmin -Q output , ptest output, BasicSanityCheck output and
>>>> messages file are all attached as a
>>>> .tar.bz2.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> believe me when i tell you that i am stumped. any assistance is
>>>> greatly appreciated.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> _Terry
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Linux-HA mailing list
>>>> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>>> http://lists.linux-ha.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-ha
>>>> See also: http://linux-ha.org/ReportingProblems
>>>>
>>>>
>> no firewall. i tested with and without iptables. in fact i even unloaded ALL
>> iptables modules just
>> to be certain. so then i thought to myself. pax? perhaps grsecurity? no
>> luck there either. i
>> rebuild a kernel without all of the grsec and pax hooks. no luck.
>>
>>
>>
>> destiny crm # lsmod
>> Module Size Used by
>> softdog 4752 0
>> tun 9184 0
>> e100 28360 0
>> sym53c8xx 64820 0
>> eepro100 25552 0
>> scsi_transport_spi 18752 1 sym53c8xx
>>
>> destiny crm # ping 127.0.0.1
>> PING 127.0.0.1 (127.0.0.1) 56(84) bytes of data.
>> 64 bytes from 127.0.0.1: icmp_seq=1 ttl=64 time=0.097 ms
>> 64 bytes from 127.0.0.1: icmp_seq=2 ttl=64 time=0.054 ms
>>
>> --- 127.0.0.1 ping statistics ---
>> 2 packets transmitted, 2 received, 0% packet loss, time 1002ms
>> rtt min/avg/max/mdev = 0.054/0.075/0.097/0.023 ms
>>
>>
>> so i re-ran BasicSAanityCheck....same result. any ideas?
>
> Here is something to run and check...
>
> ifconfig lo;ip addr show lo; route;ip route show
>
> Here's what it produces on my machine:
> lo Link encap:Local Loopback
> inet addr:127.0.0.1 Mask:255.0.0.0
> inet6 addr: ::1/128 Scope:Host
> UP LOOPBACK RUNNING MTU:16436 Metric:1
> RX packets:520006 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 frame:0
> TX packets:520006 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 carrier:0
> collisions:0 txqueuelen:0
> RX bytes:190990507 (182.1 Mb) TX bytes:190990507 (182.1 Mb)
>
> 1: lo: <LOOPBACK,UP> mtu 16436 qdisc noqueue
> link/loopback 00:00:00:00:00:00 brd 00:00:00:00:00:00
> inet 127.0.0.1/8 scope host lo
> inet6 ::1/128 scope host
> valid_lft forever preferred_lft forever
> Kernel IP routing table
> Destination Gateway Genmask Flags Metric Ref Use
> Iface
> 10.10.10.0 * 255.255.255.0 U 0 0 0 eth1
> link-local * 255.255.0.0 U 0 0 0 eth1
> loopback * 255.0.0.0 U 0 0 0 lo
> default gw 0.0.0.0 UG 0 0 0 eth1
> 10.10.10.0/24 dev eth1 proto kernel scope link src 10.10.10.5
> 169.254.0.0/16 dev eth1 scope link
> 127.0.0.0/8 dev lo scope link
> default via 10.10.10.254 dev eth1
>
>
> I don't know what I'm looking for to be different, but it's at least
> somewhere to start...
>
>
i know. there's not much to go on here....and i'm not a coder, but perhaps
someone can look in glib
as to why/when that error function would actually gets called?
destiny crm # ip addr show dev lo
2: lo: <LOOPBACK,UP,10000> mtu 16436 qdisc noqueue
link/loopback 00:00:00:00:00:00 brd 00:00:00:00:00:00
inet 127.0.0.1/8 brd 127.255.255.255 scope host lo
destiny crm # ip route show
10.254.254.0/30 dev eth1 proto kernel scope link src 10.254.254.2
x.x.x.x/28 dev eth0 proto kernel scope link src 63.147.188.174
10.0.0.0/24 dev eth2 proto kernel scope link src 10.0.0.2
127.0.0.0/8 dev lo scope link
default via x.x.x.x dev eth0
destiny crm # ifconfig lo
lo Link encap:Local Loopback
inet addr:127.0.0.1 Mask:255.0.0.0
UP LOOPBACK RUNNING MTU:16436 Metric:1
RX packets:37780 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 frame:0
TX packets:37780 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 carrier:0
collisions:0 txqueuelen:0
RX bytes:5114592 (4.8 Mb) TX bytes:5114592 (4.8 Mb)
_______________________________________________
Linux-HA mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://lists.linux-ha.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-ha
See also: http://linux-ha.org/ReportingProblems
