On Tue, 13 Apr 2010 08:43:47 +0300 (EEST) Atro Tossavainen <[email protected]> wrote:
> Andrew, > > > Atro's problem appears to be that they are advertising the extra > > addresses, though, not that they're sending packets out over them. > > What I don't get is why this would have changed transparently on the > sun4x_58 server when I changed the *other* db server from sun4x_58 to > sunx86_510 and from IBM AFS to OpenAFS. Isn't the sunx86_510 server the one that's reporting extra addresses? >From this: >>> sunx86_510 # /usr/afs/bin/udebug 128.214.88.114 7002 -long >>> Host's addresses are: 128.214.88.114 10.0.0.3 172.16.0.1 172.17.0.1 >>> 172.18.0.1 It just looks like OpenAFS will (currently) ignore NetRestrict lines with an 'M' in front as a parse error. So your upgraded sunx86_510 machine does not restrict those addresses, and advertises the private ones. Some of those are lower than the IPs of the sun4x_58 box, so the sunx86_510 box looks like the new "lowest IP" server. -- Andrew Deason [email protected] _______________________________________________ OpenAFS-info mailing list [email protected] https://lists.openafs.org/mailman/listinfo/openafs-info
