[corosync] information request

Digimer lists at alteeve.ca
Sat Nov 23 23:05:56 UTC 2013


So multicast works with the firewall disabled?

On 23/11/13 17:28, Slava Bendersky wrote:
> Hello Steven,
> I disabled iptables and no difference, error message the same, but at
> least in multicast is wasn't generate the error.
> 
> 
> Slava.
> 
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> *From: *"Digimer" <lists at alteeve.ca>
> *To: *"Slava Bendersky" <volga629 at networklab.ca>, "Steven Dake"
> <sdake at redhat.com>
> *Cc: *discuss at corosync.org
> *Sent: *Saturday, November 23, 2013 4:37:36 PM
> *Subject: *Re: [corosync] information request
> 
> Does either mcast or unicast work if you disable the firewall? If so,
> then at least you know for sure that iptables is the problem.
> 
> The link here shows the iptables rules I use (for corosync in mcast and
> other apps):
> 
> https://alteeve.ca/w/AN!Cluster_Tutorial_2#Configuring_iptables
> 
> digimer
> 
> On 23/11/13 16:12, Slava Bendersky wrote:
>> Hello Steven,
>> Than  what I see when setup through UDPU
>>
>> Nov 23 22:08:13 corosync [MAIN  ] Compatibility mode set to whitetank.
>> Using V1 and V2 of the synchronization engine.
>> Nov 23 22:08:13 corosync [TOTEM ] adding new UDPU member {10.10.10.1}
>> Nov 23 22:08:16 corosync [MAIN  ] Totem is unable to form a cluster
>> because of an operating system or network fault. The most common cause
>> of this message is that the local firewall is configured improperly.
>>
>>
>> Might be missing some firewall rules ? I allowed unicast.
>>
>> Slava.
>>
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> *From: *"Steven Dake" <sdake at redhat.com>
>> *To: *"Slava Bendersky" <volga629 at networklab.ca>
>> *Cc: *discuss at corosync.org
>> *Sent: *Saturday, November 23, 2013 10:33:31 AM
>> *Subject: *Re: [corosync] information request
>>
>>
>> On 11/23/2013 08:23 AM, Slava Bendersky wrote:
>>
>>     Hello Steven,
>>
>>     My setup
>>
>>     10.10.10.1 primary server -----EoIP tunnel vpn ipsec ----- dr server
>>     10.10.10.2
>>
>>     On both servers is 2 interfaces eth0 which default gw out and eth1
>>     where corosync live.
>>
>>     Iptables:
>>
>>     -A INPUT -i eth1 -p udp -m state --state NEW -m udp --dport 5404:5407
>>     -A INPUT -i eth1 -m pkttype --pkt-type multicast
>>     -A INPUT -i eth1 -p igmp
>>
>>
>>     Corosync.conf
>>
>>     totem {
>>             version: 2
>>             token: 160
>>             token_retransmits_before_loss_const: 3
>>             join: 250
>>             consensus: 300
>>             vsftype: none
>>             max_messages: 20
>>             threads: 0
>>             nodeid: 2
>>             rrp_mode: active
>>             interface {
>>                     ringnumber: 0
>>                     bindnetaddr: 10.10.10.0
>>                     mcastaddr: 226.94.1.1
>>                     mcastport: 5405
>>             }
>>     }
>>
>>     Join message
>>
>>     [root at eusipgw01 ~]# corosync-objctl | grep member
>>     runtime.totem.pg.mrp.srp.members.2.ip=r(0) ip(10.10.10.2)
>>     runtime.totem.pg.mrp.srp.members.2.join_count=1
>>     runtime.totem.pg.mrp.srp.members.2.status=joined
>>     runtime.totem.pg.mrp.srp.members.1.ip=r(0) ip(10.10.10.1)
>>     runtime.totem.pg.mrp.srp.members.1.join_count=254
>>     runtime.totem.pg.mrp.srp.members.1.status=joined
>>
>>     Is it possible that ping sends out of wrong interface ?
>>
>> Slava,
>>
>> I wouldn't expect so.
>>
>> Which version?
>>
>> Have you tried udpu instead?  If not, it is preferable to multicast
>> unless you want absolute performance on cpg groups.  In most cases the
>> performance difference is very small and not worth the trouble of
>> setting up multicast in your network.
>>
>> Fabio had indicated rrp active mode is broken.  I don't know the
>> details, but try passive RRP - it is actually better then active IMNSHO :)
>>
>> Regards
>> -steve
>>
>>     Slava.
>>
>>    
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>     *From: *"Steven Dake" <sdake at redhat.com>
>>     *To: *"Slava Bendersky" <volga629 at networklab.ca>, discuss at corosync.org
>>     *Sent: *Saturday, November 23, 2013 6:01:11 AM
>>     *Subject: *Re: [corosync] information request
>>
>>
>>     On 11/23/2013 12:29 AM, Slava Bendersky wrote:
>>
>>         Hello Everyone,
>>         Corosync run on box  with 2 Ethernet interfaces.
>>         I am getting this message
>>         CPG mcast failed (6)
>>
>>         Any information thank you in advance.
>>
>>
>>
>>    
> https://github.com/corosync/corosync/blob/master/include/corosync/corotypes.h#L84
>>
>>     This can occur because:
>>     a) firewall is enabled - there should be something in the logs
>>     telling you to properly configure the firewall
>>     b) a config change is in progress - this is a normal response, and
>>     you should try the request again
>>     c) a bug in the synchronization code is resulting in a blocked
>>     unsynced cluster
>>
>>     c is very unlikely at this point.
>>
>>     2 ethernet interfaces = rrp mode, bonding, or something else?
>>
>>     Digimer needs moar infos :)
>>
>>     Regards
>>     -steve
>>
>>
>>
>>         _______________________________________________
>>         discuss mailing list
>>         discuss at corosync.org
>>         http://lists.corosync.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> discuss mailing list
>> discuss at corosync.org
>> http://lists.corosync.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
>>
> 
> 
> -- 
> Digimer
> Papers and Projects: https://alteeve.ca/w/
> What if the cure for cancer is trapped in the mind of a person without
> access to education?
> 


-- 
Digimer
Papers and Projects: https://alteeve.ca/w/
What if the cure for cancer is trapped in the mind of a person without
access to education?


More information about the discuss mailing list