actually i am using successfully the following (unsupported) config: * ray servers with 2 nics (primary: data/nfs traffic, secondary for ray gfx traffic) * ray clients directly connected to secondary interface * ray clients connected over WAN, traffic routed to secondary interface * none of the ray servers acts as a dhcp server (a separate DHCP server is in use)
> It's critical that you always either use an unrouted interconnect (utadm > -a) or a fully-connected LAN (utadm -A). ray servers have been configured with utadm -L on only. utadm -a and/or utadm -A have never been called. > If you try to configure an isolated network (i.e. such that your primary > interface can't reach it) with Sun Rays, and either it's routed or you > neglect to configure it as an interconnect, your topology will not > function properly. load balancing or AMGH, as you mention it below. the only workaround i found was to translate/NAT the IPs of the primary interface to the secondary interface on an external gateway. that is what i'd like to avoid. rays directly attached to the secondary interface have no problem. the ray servers will answer requests from the rays sent over the secondary interface to the IP of the primary interface. > That said, if you do route your two subnets together, the vast bulk of > traffic (e.g. all the rendering) will remain on your secondary network. > Initial rendezvous, such as for load balancing or AMGH, will occur on > the primary interface. right. that's what i've been seeing, and i feel it is a bug (load balancing or AMGH over primary interface). how does the ray server know/decide which interface is the primary? it should be possible to tell the ray services to which IPs they shall binds the ports ... -- Psssst! Schon das coole Video vom GMX MultiMessenger gesehen? Der Eine für Alle: http://www.gmx.net/de/go/messenger03 _______________________________________________ SunRay-Users mailing list [email protected] http://www.filibeto.org/mailman/listinfo/sunray-users
