[ClusterLabs] Pacemaker ocf:heartbeat:IPaddr on different subnets

[Ken Gaillot]

On 06/20/2015 01:59 AM, Rowan @ Jetboy wrote:
> [Ubuntu 14 LTS on VMware ESXi 6; Corosync; Pacemaker 1.1.10]
> 
> I'm trying to add a Pacemaker virtual IP address; with it, the gateway,
> and the two VMs it serves on different subnets. I've only done this
> before with all IPs on the same subnet, and I need some help.
> 
> I have two VMs on 200.xx.xxx.9 and 200.xx.xxx.10 with the below in
> `/etc/network/interfaces`
> 
>     auto eth0
>     iface eth0 inet static
>         address 200.xx.xxx.9
>         gateway 200.xx.xxx.9
>         netmask 255.255.255.255
> 
>         post-up route add yy.yyy.yyy.1 dev eth0
>         post-up route add default gw yy.yyy.yyy.1

It looks like you have a networking issue rather than a clustering
issue. I'm not sure what the requirements/goals are for having the
different subnets, but the default gateway should be on a directly
connected IP network (not over a route), and the gateway itself must
know where to route each IP network.

Are all these subnets on the same (physical or VLAN) Ethernet network?
Or are there multiple interfaces involved?

> and
> 
>     auto eth0
>     iface eth0 inet static
>         address 200.xx.xxx.10
>         gateway 200.xx.xxx.10
>         netmask 255.255.255.255
> 
>         post-up route add yy.yyy.yyy.1 dev eth0
>         post-up route add default gw yy.yyy.yyy.1
> 
> They're both showing up in Pacemaker, and seemingly communicating OK.
> The bindnetaddr parameters in the two `/etc/corosync/corosync.conf`
> files are:
> 
>     bindnetaddr: address 200.xx.xxx.9
> 
> and
> 
>     bindnetaddr: address 200.xx.xxx.10
> 
> respectively.
> 
> If everything was on the same subnet, I'd expect to add the virtual IP
> with something like:
> 
>     sudo crm configure primitive eth0_virtual ocf:heartbeat:IPaddr
> params ip="200.zzz.z.162" nic="eth0" cidr_netmask="24"
> broadcast="200.zzz.z.255" op monitor interval="10s" timeout="20s"
> 
> and while this shows up as resource in crm_mon, it isn't allowing me to
> access one of the VMs via the virtual IP. Clearly there's more to it,
> but what?