Jeffrey & Sven thanks for the help. I had brought the 172.17 interfaces down but upon further inspection there was still enough information lying around which the fileserver must have been picking up. So I removed that and restarted the fileserver and everything works.
Thanks, Ken On Sat, 2004-12-11 at 19:16, Jeffrey Hutzelman wrote: > On Saturday, December 11, 2004 03:00:16 -0500 Kenneth J Baker > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > If I try to remove either of them I get the following error: > > You don't want to do that. What you're asking the vlserver to do is to > remove the entire server, which it can't do because it knows about volumes > on that server -- and which isn't what you want anyway. > > What you need to do is to get the fileserver to register the correct set of > addresses. The fileserver registers its addresses on startup, based on the > interfaces present and the contents of the NetInfo and NetRestrict files. > > If you want the 172.17 addresses to go away, you need to either make those > interfaces go away (configuring them down may not be enough), or add those > addresses to the NetRestrict files on the fileservers. > > > I investigated and it appears that the file servers themselves are using > > only the correct interface: Sat Dec 11 02:37:00 2004 Getting FileServer > > name... > > Sat Dec 11 02:37:00 2004 FileServer host name is 'deedee' > > Sat Dec 11 02:37:00 2004 Getting FileServer address... > > Sat Dec 11 02:37:00 2004 FileServer deedee has address 66.92.68.189 > > (0xbd445c42 or 0x425c44bd in host byte order) Sat Dec 11 02:37:00 2004 > > File Server started Sat Dec 11 02:37:00 2004 ** ** > > Sat Dec 11 01:51:19 2004 Getting FileServer name... > > Sat Dec 11 01:51:19 2004 FileServer host name is 'dharma' > > Sat Dec 11 01:51:19 2004 Getting FileServer address... > > Sat Dec 11 01:51:19 2004 FileServer dharma has address 66.205.64.240 > > (0xf040cd42 or 0x42cd40f0 in host byte order) Sat Dec 11 01:51:19 2004 > > File Server started Sat Dec 11 01:51:19 2004 > > No; that's not what that means. The "Fileserver... has address" message > tells you what the fileserver's primary address is; it does not indicate > that no other addresses have been registered with the VLDB. > > > Sven Oehme wrote: > > just do the following per server : > > > > vos delentry -server 172.17.193.x > > vos syncvldb servername > > vos syncserv servername > > > > now the vos changeaddr 172.17.193.2 -remove -local should work ... > > No, don't do that. Not only will it result in a service outage during the > time when you remove every volume on that server from the VLDB and the time > when vos syncvldb puts them back, it also won't make your problem go away. > As the output from 'vos listaddrs -printuuid' indicates, each server has > both addresses. Removing and re-adding the volumes won't change the set of > addresses associated with the server, and won't split the one server into > two. > > > -- Jeffrey T. Hutzelman (N3NHS) <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Sr. Research Systems Programmer > School of Computer Science - Research Computing Facility > Carnegie Mellon University - Pittsburgh, PA > > > > > _______________________________________________ > OpenAFS-info mailing list > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > https://lists.openafs.org/mailman/listinfo/openafs-info _______________________________________________ OpenAFS-info mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.openafs.org/mailman/listinfo/openafs-info
