[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]

Re: [Linux-cluster] Two node NFS cluster serving multiple networks



Guess I forgot to edit those IP's :).

I thought you could only have one default gateway on a machine.
I've never needed to deal with multiple nics other than bonded.

PS: What does tab 1/2 mean?

Mike


On Thu, 13 Mar 2008 13:39:25 -0700, Alex Kompel wrote:
> Google "linux policy based routing".
> 
> In your example you just need to setup different gateways for both
> interfaces. For example:
> ip route add default via 69.2.237.57 dev eth0 tab 1
> ip route add default via 192.168.1.1 dev eth1 tab 2
> 
> 
> On Thu, Mar 13, 2008 at 9:23 AM, isplist logicore net
> <isplist logicore net> wrote:
>> Is there a good document somewhere which explains in not too great
>> technical
>> terms how to use multiple nics on a system. I've been running bonded nics
>> for
>> many years but getting a machine to use two (or more networks) is still a
>> mystery to me.
>> 
>> For example, I have a VoIP machine which has two nics which I have
>> problems
>> with because I don't understand the above yet.
>> 
>> This machine has a nic allows incoming VoIP/ZIP connections to it's
>> public IP
>> address on a T1. The router blocks everything but that traffic.
>> 
>> Then it has a second nic which has a private IP on it to allow for
>> management
>> of the machine. Yet recently, it lost it's DNS, it can't seem to get
>> access to
>> DNS on it's own. I can force it to use DNS by typing ping commands a
>> couple of
>> times but it cannot do it on it's own to get it's updates for example.
>> 
>> Basically, I need the machine to see it's public gateway at xx.x.237.59 to
>> route it's VoIP/SIP traffic but I also need it to see it's private
>> gateway at
>> 192.168.1.0 so that it can use DNS and other internal services properly.
>> 
>> route -n
>> Kernel IP routing table
>> Destination   Gateway      Genmask            Flags Metric Ref    Use
>> Iface
>> xx.x.237.56   0.0.0.0        255.255.255.248 U     0      0        0 eth0
>> 192.168.1.0  0.0.0.0        255.255.255.0    U     0      0        0 eth1
>> 169.254.0.0  0.0.0.0        255.255.0.0        U     0      0        0
>> eth1
>> 0.0.0.0         69.2.237.57   0.0.0.0             UG    0      0        0
>> eth0
>> 
>> ifconfig
>> eth0      Link encap:Ethernet  HWaddr 00:90:27:DC:4B:E6
>> inet addr:xx.x.237.59  Bcast:69.2.237.63  Mask:255.255.255.248
>> inet6 addr: fe80::290:27ff:fedc:4be6/64 Scope:Link
>> UP BROADCAST RUNNING MULTICAST  MTU:1500  Metric:1
>> RX packets:33910280 errors:16 dropped:0 overruns:0 frame:16
>> TX packets:45988648 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 carrier:0
>> collisions:24746 txqueuelen:1000
>> RX bytes:681966199 (650.3 MiB)  TX bytes:1657358619 (1.5 GiB)
>> 
>> eth1      Link encap:Ethernet  HWaddr 00:13:20:55:D7:CE
>> inet addr:192.168.1.102  Bcast:192.168.1.255  Mask:255.255.255.0
>> inet6 addr: fe80::213:20ff:fe55:d7ce/64 Scope:Link
>> UP BROADCAST RUNNING MULTICAST  MTU:1500  Metric:1
>> RX packets:87417784 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 frame:0
>> TX packets:70881957 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 carrier:0
>> collisions:0 txqueuelen:1000
>> RX bytes:4171601084 (3.8 GiB)  TX bytes:1547562481 (1.4 GiB)
>> 
>> lo        Link encap:Local Loopback
>> inet addr:127.0.0.1  Mask:255.0.0.0
>> inet6 addr: ::1/128 Scope:Host
>> UP LOOPBACK RUNNING  MTU:16436  Metric:1
>> RX packets:6501004 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 frame:0
>> TX packets:6501004 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 carrier:0
>> collisions:0 txqueuelen:0
>> RX bytes:897257336 (855.6 MiB)  TX bytes:897257336 (855.6 MiB)
>> 
>> 
>> Mike
>> 
>> 
>> On Wed, 12 Mar 2008 10:39:50 -0700, Alex Kompel wrote:
>>> You will still need some way to tell the system through which
>>> 
>>> interface you want to route outgoing packets for each target.
>>> You can achieve the same with greater ease by splitting the network in
>>> 2 subnets and assigning each to a single interface.
>>> It all depends on the problem you are trying to solve. If you want
>>> redundancy - use active-passive bonding, you want throughput - use
>>> active-active bonding (if your switch supports link aggregation), if
>>> you want security and isolation - use separate subnets.
>>> 
>>> -Alex
>>> 
>>> 2008/3/12 Brian Kroth <bpkroth wisc edu>:
>>>> This is a hypothetical, but what if you have two interfaces on the
>>>> same
>>>> network and want to force one service IP to one interface and the
>>>> other
>>>> to a different interface?  I think what everyone is wondering is how
>>>> much control one has over the service IP placement.
>>>> 
>>>> Thanks,
>>>> Brian
>>>> 
>>>> Finnur Örn Guðmundsson - TM Software <fog t is> 2008-03-12 14:36:
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>>> Hi,
>>>>> 
>>>>> I see no reason why you could not have 3 diffrent interfaces, each
>>>>> connected to the networks you are trying to serve the NFS requests
>>>>> to/from. RG Manager will add the floating interfaces to the
>>>>> "correct"
>>>>> interface, that is, if your floating ip is 1.2.3.4 and you have a
>>>>> interface with the IP address 1.2.3.3 he will add the IP to that
>>>>> interface.
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> Bgrds,
>>>>> Finnur
>>>>> 
>>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>>> From: linux-cluster-bounces redhat com [mailto:linux-cluster-
>>>>> bounces redhat com] On Behalf Of gordan bobich net
>>>>> Sent: 12. mars 2008 14:10
>>>>> To: linux clustering
>>>>> Subject: Re: [Linux-cluster] Two node NFS cluster serving multiple
>>>>> networks
>>>>> 
>>>>> Sounds very similar to what I'm trying to achieve (see the other
>>>>> thread
>>>>> about binding failover resources to interfaces). I've not seen a
>>>>> response
>>>>> yet, so I'm most curious to see if you'll get any.
>>>>> 
>>>>> Gordan
>>>>> 
>>>>> On Wed, 12 Mar 2008, Randy Brown wrote:
>>>>> 
>>>>>> I am using a two node cluster with Centos 5 with up to date
>>>>>> patches.
>>>>>> We have
>>>>>> three different networks to which I would like to serve nfs mounts
>>>>>> from this
>>>>>> cluster.  Can this even be done?  I have interfaces available for
>>>>>> each
>>>>>> network in each node?
>>>>>> 
>>>>> --
>>>>> Linux-cluster mailing list
>>>>> Linux-cluster redhat com
>>>>> https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/linux-cluster
>>>>> 
>>>>> --
>>>>> Linux-cluster mailing list
>>>>> Linux-cluster redhat com
>>>>> https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/linux-cluster
>>>>> 
>>>> --
>>>> Linux-cluster mailing list
>>>> Linux-cluster redhat com
>>>> https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/linux-cluster
>>>> 
>>> 
>>> --
>>> Linux-cluster mailing list
>>> Linux-cluster redhat com
>>> https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/linux-cluster
>> 
>> 
>> --
>> Linux-cluster mailing list
>> Linux-cluster redhat com
>> https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/linux-cluster
>> 
> 
> --
> Linux-cluster mailing list
> Linux-cluster redhat com
> https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/linux-cluster





[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]