Mike,

I'm using link based config but have this issue! It is e1000g0 is active and e1000g2 is standby. Is ICMP is the issue or something else.?



Kind Regards,

-----------------------------------------
Malahat Qureshi Ph.D. (MIS)
Sr. Consultant Support System
HTSU -- eBusiness Infrastructure
Ph. 847-291-2284 C: 847-309-0090
Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
-----------------------------------------



----- Original Message -----
From: "Mike Gerdts" [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: 05/19/2007 12:47 PM
To: "Malahat Qureshi (Gmail)" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [networking-discuss] IPMP on Solaris 10 issues

On 5/19/07, Malahat Qureshi (Gmail) <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hi Folks-

I'm having couple of issues to configure IPMP in our InterNet environment

1- on InterNet web servers all three IP's belongs to same subnet group
172.x.x.x  but after configuring IPMP (which is working on other internal
environment) config is Active & Standby  , after reboot both interface is
showing failed,,, I checked with Network folks and found the router is
Firewall and ICMP traffic is not allowed --? Is this is the reason of some
thing else ? any idea ?

If you are using probe based IPMP (you have test addresses) then it is
using ICMP echo (ping) to determine if the links are ok.  If you
configure link-based IPMP (no test addresses) you shouldn't have this
problem.

Notice the "shouldn't".  There are various bugs that could make IPMP
think that one or more of the (non-test) IP addresses in the IPMP
group are actually test addresses.  I'm not sure of the state of these
bugs in Nevada, but as of relatively recent Solaris 10 patches
(recommended + security that includes 125100-06) the problem exists.

If you are using zone IP addresses as the only addresses on a set of
IPMP'd NICs, there is another set of bugs that you will likely hit.
Search the archives for my previous posts for details.  For Solaris 10
an IDR against the ip driver is available.  When I look at the history
of ip.c 
(http://cvs.opensolaris.org/source/history/onnv/onnv-gate/usr/src/uts/common/inet/ip/ip.c)
I see nothing in recent history that looks like this exists in Nevada.

That being said, there is a re-work of IPMP underway.  Keep an eye on
http://blogs.sun.com/meem/ for details.

2- I have web servers thress IP addresses are 172.x.x.x and one 63.x.x.x,
The challenge I have front of me that I want 63..x.x.x ( Public IP) should
be failover with 172.x.x.x (floating IP) whenever there is anetwork issue
--- No idea do I need to add an addif command in hostname.e1000g2 file or
what else

Even if you could coax IPMP into doing this for you, I suspect you
will have routing issues that would prevent you from having any
benefit.  If you are limited by physical connections and this is the
reason for wanting this config, you may want to explore VLAN tagging
along with IPMP.

Mike

--
Mike Gerdts
http://mgerdts.blogspot.com/
_______________________________________________
networking-discuss mailing list
[email protected]
-----------------------------------------
******************************************************************
This message originated from the Internet.  Its originator may or
may not be who they claim to be and the information contained in
the message and any attachments may or may not be accurate.
******************************************************************
-----------------------------------------
******************************************************************
This E-mail is confidential. It may also be legally privileged. If
you are not the addressee you may not copy, forward, disclose or
use any part of it. If you have received this message in error,
please delete it and all copies from your system and notify the
sender immediately by return E-mail.

Internet communications cannot be guaranteed to be timely, secure,
error or virus-free. The sender does not accept liability for any
errors or omissions.
******************************************************************
SAVE PAPER - THINK BEFORE YOU PRINT!
_______________________________________________
networking-discuss mailing list
[email protected]

Reply via email to