Is there anyone out there who has successfully setup a carp system with
Intel gigabit NIC's? (not necessarily with Pfsense only)


-----Original Message-----
From: Scott Ullrich [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Monday, 27 March 2006 9:35 a.m.
To: [email protected]
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [pfSense Support] Carp is a bit confused...

Jan Z is also having problems with these nics.  Starting to point to a
driver issue...

On 3/26/06, Simon O'Sullivan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Peter,
>
> Are you able to test your setup using cards other than Intel Gigabit
NIC's?
> These master/slave carp type problems are identical to the problems that
I'm
> experiencing with Intel gigabit NICs. I haven't any spare HW at the moment
> so can't myself.
>
> Simon.
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Peter Curran [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Saturday, 25 March 2006 7:18 a.m.
> To: [email protected]
> Subject: Re: [pfSense Support] Carp is a bit confused...
>
> No - this is not the problem.  I have quadruple checked all this and it is
> consistent and correct.
>
> I have just tried increasing the advertising frequency on the slave, but
> although it flicked to 'backup' status briefly because of the change, it
> reverted to 'master' shortly after.
>
> I have also tried reversing the sense:  ie making the master the slave,
the
> slave the master.  The position is the same as it was before, with both
> systems claiming to be Master.
>
> Frustrating!
>
> /peter
>
> On Friday 24 March 2006 09:32, Amorim, Nuno Alexandre (ext) wrote:
> > Hello Peter
> >
> > I had a similar issue. Verify the netmask of the carp interface. It is
the
> > same has the network.
> >
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Peter Curran [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Sent: sexta-feira, 24 de Março de 2006 0:09
> > To: [email protected]
> > Subject: Re: [pfSense Support] Carp is a bit confused...
> >
> > Hi Scott
> >
> > On Thursday 23 March 2006 23:00, Scott Ullrich wrote:
> > > > I have two boxes in parallel, running with Carp used to service 6
> > > > addresses in total - 3 on the WAN interface and the remaining 3
spread
> > > > between 3 internal interfaces.  All seems to work OK - when I check
> the
> > > > Carp status on FW1 all CARP addresses show up as Master.  However,
> when
> > > > I check the same on FW2 all addresses except 1 show up as Backup -
the
> > > > odd one out shows up as Master. The logs show 'arp_rtrequest: bad
> > > > gateway y.y.y.y (!AF_LINK)', where y.y.y.y is the affected Carp
> address
> > > > - this seems to occur every few seconds, so I assume that Carp is
> > > > trying to assert control over the address.  Any idea what is wrong?
> > >
> > > Is this a vlan?
> >
> > No - it is a real interface.  The LAN interface is a VLAN, but that
seems
> > to be OK.
> >
> > > > My second problem concerns Failover Ipsec.  When I check the SAD on
> the
> > > > active firewall I see a pair of entries for a live IPsec tunnel,
> > > > however the same information is not shown on the other firewall.  Is
> > > > this expected behaviour?
> > >
> > > SASYNCD is not fully working yet.  We need some help in finishing the
> > > port.   So yes.
> >
> > OK - what is outstanding on the port (apart from the minor bug in the
GUI
> > and a need for a better way to handle the AES key)?
> >
> > /peter
> >
> > --
> > This message has been scanned for viruses and
> > dangerous content by MailScanner, and is
> > believed to be clean.
> >
> >
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >
> >
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> --
> This message has been scanned for viruses and
> dangerous content by MailScanner, and is
> believed to be clean.
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Reply via email to