I hate to disagree with you Herb, but there are a great number of reasons you would not want to set up routing between those networks. First of all, making 'private' subnets visible to the public network is a no-no. Second, private networks are often secluded for security reasons. Bridging the gap could have many unintended consequences.
Lustre should be able to do all the routing with no problem. Servers: LNET tcp0 network Routers: LNET tcp0,tcp1 networks Clients: LNET tcp1 network server (192.168.x) <----> (192.168.x) router (132.246.x) <----> (132.246.x) client Make sure you have ip_forwarding enabled on the router node. Make sure 'options lnet forwarding="enabled"' is set on the router node. The router will find routes automatically. You just need to specify both networks: options lnet networks=tcp0(eth0),tcp1(eth1) On the client you need: options lnet networks=tcp0(eth0) routes "tcp1 [EMAIL PROTECTED]" (routers 132.246.x IP addr) On the server you need: options lnet networks=tcp1(eth0) routes "tcp0 [EMAIL PROTECTED]" (routers 192.168.x IP addr) Does that make sense? -Marc ---- D. Marc Stearman LC Lustre Systems Administrator [EMAIL PROTECTED] 925.423.9670 Pager: 1.888.203.0641 On Jan 16, 2008, at 2:07 PM, Herb Wartens wrote: > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > Hash: SHA512 > > IMHO it would be better for you to set up host routing (or whatever it > is that you wanted) to be ablr to route between these networks. It > would > be best to avoid the routing code if it is possible since you would > be introducing > some new problems by having the routing turned on. > With routing enabled you would not have immediate notification that > a server went down > for example. This causes longer delays on the client when doing > things like failover > since you would have to wait for a timeout to occur before the > client would actually > try the failover server. I think with the adaptive timeouts this > could be resolved, > but I think that things like this would be better to avoid if you > don't especially > need to use it IMHO (we mainly use it here to route between > different transports > ethernet to infiniband for example). > > - -Herb > > Jerome, Ron wrote: >> The issue is the fact that the luster filesystem is on a private >> (192.168.xxx.xxx) network and the client is on a public network, so >> bidirectional ip traffic routing gets messy (NATing, port forwarding >> etc). I was hoping to avoid this by using a gateway lustre node >> that is >> connected to both networks. >> >> Ron. >> >>> -----Original Message----- >>> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:lustre-discuss- >>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Herb Wartens >>> Sent: January 16, 2008 2:32 PM >>> To: Lustre Discuss >>> Subject: Re: [Lustre-discuss] How to configure routing >>> >> >> Ron, >> I am not exactly familiar with your particular setup, but when using >> tcp >> is there any reason why you can't use a single lnet network? I >>> believe >> that >> it would be easier for you to set up one socklnd network named tcp0 >> that >> contains both interfaces. Then all you have to do is make sure that >>> it >> is possible >> through host routes (or other means) for the two networks to route to >> each other. >> >> -Herb >> >> Jerome, Ron wrote: >>>>> I would like to use a client as a router between two tcp networks >> (eth0 >>>>> and eth1) but it is unclear to me how to configure this in >> modprobe.conf. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Any suggestions would be greatly appreciated. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> _________________________________________ >>>>> Ron Jerome >>>>> Programmer/Analyst >>>>> National Research Council Canada >>>>> M-2, 1200 Montreal Road, Ottawa, Ontario K1A 0R6 >>>>> Government of Canada >>>>> _________________________________________ >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>> -------------------------------------------------------------------- >>> - >> --- >>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>> Lustre-discuss mailing list >>>>> [email protected] >>>>> https://mail.clusterfs.com/mailman/listinfo/lustre-discuss >>> > _______________________________________________ > Lustre-discuss mailing list > [email protected] > https://mail.clusterfs.com/mailman/listinfo/lustre-discuss > > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- > Version: GnuPG v1.4.7 (GNU/Linux) > Comment: Using GnuPG with Fedora - http://enigmail.mozdev.org > > iD8DBQFHjoApP/62XqEEbMYRCjNaAJ9f17fLOlcJzMb62LjBD/rt4u4MFQCgkWRD > H69WcXuJaVymWWJEEc2ufv4= > =IUFY > -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- > > _______________________________________________ > Lustre-discuss mailing list > [email protected] > https://mail.clusterfs.com/mailman/listinfo/lustre-discuss _______________________________________________ Lustre-discuss mailing list [email protected] https://mail.clusterfs.com/mailman/listinfo/lustre-discuss
