Re: [ovirt-users] ilo4 vs. ipmilan fencing agents
On 07/21/2014 05:29 PM, Jason Brooks wrote: If you change the mapping to use the native scripts its OK as long as it works for you addin Marec G to the thread Marec, should we always map ILO3 & ILO4 to the native scripts (fence_ilo3 , fence_ilo4) and not to ipmilan ??? yes, it is better as they already contains what is required. m, sorry, for late answer - PTO ___ Users mailing list Users@ovirt.org http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/users
Re: [ovirt-users] ilo4 vs. ipmilan fencing agents
- Original Message - > From: "Eli Mesika" > To: "Jason Brooks" > Cc: "users" , "Marek Grac" > Sent: Saturday, July 19, 2014 1:45:37 PM > Subject: Re: [ovirt-users] ilo4 vs. ipmilan fencing agents > > > > - Original Message - > > From: "Jason Brooks" > > To: "users" > > Sent: Thursday, July 10, 2014 1:02:13 AM > > Subject: [ovirt-users] ilo4 vs. ipmilan fencing agents > > > > Hi all -- > > > > I'm trying to get fencing squared away in my cluster of hp dl-380 servers, > > which come with ilo4. I was able to get a successful status check from > > the command line with fence_ilo4, but not w/ the ilo4 option in ovirt. > > > > I see, though, that ilo4 in ovirt just maps to fence_ipmilan, and I was > > not able to get a successful status check w/ fence_ipmilan from the cli. > > > > So, I tried resetting the mapping so that ilo4 maps to ilo4. Now I can > > complete the power management test in ovirt, but I imagine there's some > > reason why ovirt isn't configured this way by default. > > > > Will fencing actually work for me with ilo4 mapped to ilo4, rather than > > to ipmilan? > > ILO3 and ILO4 are mapped implicitly to ipmilan with lanplus flag ON and > power_wait=4 On my installation, ilo4 w/ no options fails the test. ilo4 w/ lanplus=on in the options field succeeds. Is it possible that the lanplus=on options isn't being registered/applied properly? Jason > If you change the mapping to use the native scripts its OK as long as it > works for you > addin Marec G to the thread > Marec, should we always map ILO3 & ILO4 to the native scripts (fence_ilo3 , > fence_ilo4) and not to ipmilan ??? > > > > > Thanks, Jason > > > > --- > > > > Jason Brooks > > Red Hat Open Source and Standards > > > > @jasonbrooks | @redhatopen > > http://community.redhat.com > > > > > > ___ > > Users mailing list > > Users@ovirt.org > > http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/users > > > ___ Users mailing list Users@ovirt.org http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/users
Re: [ovirt-users] ilo4 vs. ipmilan fencing agents
On 07/19/2014 10:45 PM, Eli Mesika wrote: - Original Message - From: "Jason Brooks" To: "users" Sent: Thursday, July 10, 2014 1:02:13 AM Subject: [ovirt-users] ilo4 vs. ipmilan fencing agents Hi all -- I'm trying to get fencing squared away in my cluster of hp dl-380 servers, which come with ilo4. I was able to get a successful status check from the command line with fence_ilo4, but not w/ the ilo4 option in ovirt. I see, though, that ilo4 in ovirt just maps to fence_ipmilan, and I was not able to get a successful status check w/ fence_ipmilan from the cli. So, I tried resetting the mapping so that ilo4 maps to ilo4. Now I can complete the power management test in ovirt, but I imagine there's some reason why ovirt isn't configured this way by default. Will fencing actually work for me with ilo4 mapped to ilo4, rather than to ipmilan? ILO3 and ILO4 are mapped implicitly to ipmilan with lanplus flag ON and power_wait=4 If you change the mapping to use the native scripts its OK as long as it works for you addin Marec G to the thread Marec, should we always map ILO3 & ILO4 to the native scripts (fence_ilo3 , fence_ilo4) and not to ipmilan ??? yes, it is better but adding arguments manually is fine also. m, ___ Users mailing list Users@ovirt.org http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/users
Re: [ovirt-users] ilo4 vs. ipmilan fencing agents
- Original Message - > From: "Jason Brooks" > To: "users" > Sent: Thursday, July 10, 2014 1:02:13 AM > Subject: [ovirt-users] ilo4 vs. ipmilan fencing agents > > Hi all -- > > I'm trying to get fencing squared away in my cluster of hp dl-380 servers, > which come with ilo4. I was able to get a successful status check from > the command line with fence_ilo4, but not w/ the ilo4 option in ovirt. > > I see, though, that ilo4 in ovirt just maps to fence_ipmilan, and I was > not able to get a successful status check w/ fence_ipmilan from the cli. > > So, I tried resetting the mapping so that ilo4 maps to ilo4. Now I can > complete the power management test in ovirt, but I imagine there's some > reason why ovirt isn't configured this way by default. > > Will fencing actually work for me with ilo4 mapped to ilo4, rather than > to ipmilan? ILO3 and ILO4 are mapped implicitly to ipmilan with lanplus flag ON and power_wait=4 If you change the mapping to use the native scripts its OK as long as it works for you addin Marec G to the thread Marec, should we always map ILO3 & ILO4 to the native scripts (fence_ilo3 , fence_ilo4) and not to ipmilan ??? > > Thanks, Jason > > --- > > Jason Brooks > Red Hat Open Source and Standards > > @jasonbrooks | @redhatopen > http://community.redhat.com > > > ___ > Users mailing list > Users@ovirt.org > http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/users > ___ Users mailing list Users@ovirt.org http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/users
Re: [ovirt-users] ilo4 vs. ipmilan fencing agents
My colleague figured out that in order for ipmilan to work, I had to include lanplus=on in the options. Apparently, lanplus=on is the default for the ilo4 agent, and lanplus=off is the default for the ipmilan agent. - Original Message - > From: "Jason Brooks" > To: "users" > Sent: Wednesday, July 9, 2014 3:02:13 PM > Subject: [ovirt-users] ilo4 vs. ipmilan fencing agents > > Hi all -- > > I'm trying to get fencing squared away in my cluster of hp dl-380 servers, > which come with ilo4. I was able to get a successful status check from > the command line with fence_ilo4, but not w/ the ilo4 option in ovirt. > > I see, though, that ilo4 in ovirt just maps to fence_ipmilan, and I was > not able to get a successful status check w/ fence_ipmilan from the cli. > > So, I tried resetting the mapping so that ilo4 maps to ilo4. Now I can > complete the power management test in ovirt, but I imagine there's some > reason why ovirt isn't configured this way by default. > > Will fencing actually work for me with ilo4 mapped to ilo4, rather than > to ipmilan? > > Thanks, Jason > > --- > > Jason Brooks > Red Hat Open Source and Standards > > @jasonbrooks | @redhatopen > http://community.redhat.com > > > ___ > Users mailing list > Users@ovirt.org > http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/users > ___ Users mailing list Users@ovirt.org http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/users
[ovirt-users] ilo4 vs. ipmilan fencing agents
Hi all -- I'm trying to get fencing squared away in my cluster of hp dl-380 servers, which come with ilo4. I was able to get a successful status check from the command line with fence_ilo4, but not w/ the ilo4 option in ovirt. I see, though, that ilo4 in ovirt just maps to fence_ipmilan, and I was not able to get a successful status check w/ fence_ipmilan from the cli. So, I tried resetting the mapping so that ilo4 maps to ilo4. Now I can complete the power management test in ovirt, but I imagine there's some reason why ovirt isn't configured this way by default. Will fencing actually work for me with ilo4 mapped to ilo4, rather than to ipmilan? Thanks, Jason --- Jason Brooks Red Hat Open Source and Standards @jasonbrooks | @redhatopen http://community.redhat.com ___ Users mailing list Users@ovirt.org http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/users
