[ClusterLabs] Antw: Re: [Question] About movement of pacemaker_remote.

renayama19661014 at ybb.ne.jp renayama19661014 at ybb.ne.jp
Tue Apr 28 01:06:25 EDT 2015

Hi David,

Even if the result changed the remote node to RHEL7.1, it was the same.

I try it with a host node of pacemaker as RHEL7.1 this time.

I noticed an interesting phenomenon.
The remote node fails in a reconnection in the first crm_resource.
However, the remote node succeeds in a reconnection in the second crm_resource.

I think that I have some problem with the point where I cut the connection with the remote node first.

Best Regards,
Hideo Yamauchi.

----- Original Message -----
> From: "renayama19661014 at ybb.ne.jp" <renayama19661014 at ybb.ne.jp>
> To: Cluster Labs - All topics related to open-source clustering welcomed <users at clusterlabs.org>
> Cc: 
> Date: 2015/4/28, Tue 11:52
> Subject: Re: [ClusterLabs] Antw: Re: [Question] About movement of pacemaker_remote.
> Hi David,
> Thank you for comments.
>> At first glance this looks gnutls related.  GNUTLS is returning -50 during 
> receive
>> on the client side (pacemaker's side). -50 maps to 'invalid 
> request'. >debug: crm_remote_recv_once:     TLS receive failed: The 
> request is invalid. >We treat this error as fatal and destroy the connection. 
> I've never encountered
>> this error and I don't know what causes it. It's possible 
> there's a bug in
>> our gnutls usage... it's also possible there's a bug in the version 
> of gnutls
>> that is in use as well. 
> We built the remote node in RHEL6.5.
> Because it may be a problem of gnutls, I confirm it in RHEL7.1.
> Best Regards,
> Hideo Yamauchi.
> _______________________________________________
> Users mailing list: Users at clusterlabs.org
> http://clusterlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/users
> Project Home: http://www.clusterlabs.org
> Getting started: http://www.clusterlabs.org/doc/Cluster_from_Scratch.pdf
> Bugs: http://bugs.clusterlabs.org

More information about the Users mailing list