ctdb w/ per_ip_routing

[Stefan (metze) Metzmacher]

Am 11.01.2014 00:08, schrieb Martin Schwenke:
> Hi Bill,
> 
> On Fri, 10 Jan 2014 16:53:05 -0600, William Marshall
> <bmarsh at us.ibm.com> wrote:
> 
>> I am trying to setup ctdb on Red Hat 6.4. The system has 2 interfaces and
>> I'm want to have some public addresses on each interface. I don't know how
>> typical it is, but my networks require me to respond to the packets on the
>> interface they arrived on.
> 
> Which version of CTDB are you running?  The per-ip-routing support has
> been substantially rewritten in the 2.x series.  However, it won't
> directly change the answer since the behaviour hasn't changed much.
> 
>> I was able to modify /etc/ctdb/events.d/13.per_ip_routing so that a default
>> entry was created in addition to the IP route add command that was already
>> there, but I'd like to know if this change makes sense.
> 
> I don't think you need to do that...
>>
>> All the IPs on my eth0 (10.10.227.x) were working fine. Today I was adding
>> a public IP on eth1 (10.10.228.x)
>>
>> Here's some of the settings I have. Initially I tried the
>> auto_routing_conf, but that didn't work. It might work now w/ the added
>> default.
>>
>> CTDB_PER_IP_ROUTING_CONF="/etc/ctdb/per_ip_routing.conf"
>> CTDB_PER_IP_ROUTING_TABLE_ID_LOW=240
>> CTDB_PER_IP_ROUTING_TABLE_ID_HIGH=246
>> CTDB_PER_IP_ROUTING_RULE_PREF=100
>> CTDB_PER_IP_ROUTING_DEBUG=yes
> 
> Your LOW and HIGH setting are nice and conservative, so you're unlikely
> to accidentally stomp on any other tables by accident.  However, if you
> add IP addresses in the future and forget to expand that range then you
> might see weird failures.  I'd suggest a wider range somewhere
> between 1000 and 9000...

Isn't the table space 0..255 ?

metze