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

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



> Well, that depends where his DNS servers are. If they are on, for
> example, 192.168.2 then DNS traffic is routed through the public
> interface.

Public's don't allow clients so I have private's on the 192.168.1.0 network.
 
> 2008/3/13 Bennie Thomas <Bennie_R_Thomas raytheon com>:
>> I never use multiple routes. can cause you some grief. Make sure your
>> /etc/hosts, /etc/resolv.conf, /etc/nsswitch.conf files.
>> I use multiple networks currently and have no problems with the traffic
>> going out the correct paths
>> 
>> B
>> 
>> 
>> splist logicore net wrote:
>> 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
>> 
>> 
>> --
>> 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]