Hi,

        It's totaly normal 'cause your bindnetaddr doesn't correspond to any 
interface. I explain :

        The bindnetaddr parameter must contain a vlid network address (not IP 
address of the server but IP address of the network).

        On your server you've got 4 ethernet interfaces with their respective 
network adresse :
        eth0 => IP: 172.20.3.X  NetIP: 172.20.3.0 Bcast: 172.20.3.63
        eth1 => IP: 172.20.76.X NetIP: 172.20.76.0 Bcast: 172.20.76.255
        eth2 => IP: 172.20.77.X NetIP: 172.20.77.0 Bcast: 172.20.77.255
        eth3 => IP: 192.168.0.61 NetIP: 192.168.0.0 Bcast: 192.168.0.255

        As you can see, the only one bindnetaddr that correspond to a valid 
NetIP is 192.168.0.0 so the behaviour is correct.

        If you want that corosync bind to eth0 you must replace 172.20.0.0 by 
172.20.3.0 and all would work correctly.

        Regards,
        Bruno

Le 13/08/2012 09:41, Ulrich Windl a écrit :
> Hi!
>
> I have a problem with corosync as of SLES11 SP2 (current updates):
>
> Given these routing table:
> # netstat -rn
> Kernel IP routing table
> Destination     Gateway         Genmask         Flags   MSS Window  irtt Iface
> 0.0.0.0         172.20.3.62     0.0.0.0         UG        0 0          0 eth0
> 127.0.0.0       0.0.0.0         255.0.0.0       U         0 0          0 lo
> 172.20.3.0      0.0.0.0         255.255.255.192 U         0 0          0 eth0
> 172.20.76.0     0.0.0.0         255.255.255.0   U         0 0          0 eth2
> 172.20.77.0     0.0.0.0         255.255.255.0   U         0 0          0 eth3
> 192.168.0.0     0.0.0.0         255.255.255.0   U         0 0          0 eth1
>
> and this ring configuration:
>          interface {
>                  bindnetaddr:    172.20.0.0
>                  mcastaddr:      239.192.3.9
>                  mcastport:      5405
>                  ringnumber:     0
>          }
>          interface {
>                  mcastaddr:      239.192.3.109
>                  mcastport:      5405
>                  bindnetaddr:    192.168.0.0
>                  ringnumber:     1
>          }
>
> I get:
> # corosync-cfgtool -s
> Printing ring status.
> Local node ID 16777343
> RING ID 0
>          id      = 127.0.0.1
>          status  = ring 0 active with no faults
> RING ID 1
>          id      = 192.168.0.61
>          status  = ring 1 active with no faults
>
> So why isn't corosync using eth0 as interface? for ring 0? In this 
> configuration nodes cannot join the cluster. I couldn't find any error or 
> warning during initial startup regarding the choice of the network 
> address/interface. I guess there's a bug in it.
> corosync-1.4.1-0.13.1
> pacemaker-1.1.6-1.29.1
>
> Regards,
> Ulrich
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Linux-HA mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://lists.linux-ha.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-ha
> See also: http://linux-ha.org/ReportingProblems
>


-- 

Bruno MACADRE
-------------------------------------------------------------------
  Ingénieur Systèmes et Réseau     | Systems and Network Engineer
  Département Informatique         | Department of computer science
  Responsable Réseau et Téléphonie | Telecom and Network Manager
  Université de Rouen              | University of Rouen
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Coordonnées / Contact :
        Université de Rouen
        Faculté des Sciences et Techniques - Madrillet
        Avenue de l'Université - BP12
        76801 St Etienne du Rouvray CEDEX
        FRANCE

        Tél : +33 (0)2-32-95-51-86
        Fax : +33 (0)2-32-95-51-87
-------------------------------------------------------------------

_______________________________________________
Linux-HA mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.linux-ha.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-ha
See also: http://linux-ha.org/ReportingProblems

Reply via email to