[ClusterLabs] Antw: Corosync ring marked as FAULTY
Denis Gribkov
dun at itsts.net
Mon Mar 6 11:30:14 EST 2017
Hi Everyone.
On 22/02/17 10:54, Vladislav Bogdanov wrote:
> That could be igmp querier issue. Corosync does not follow "common"
> model of mcast usage - one sender/router in a segment and many
> receivers. Instead, all corosync nodes are mcast senders and
> receivers. For that to work reliably, both IGMP snooping should be
> enabled and *work* in a segment and IGMP querier exists there (in
> absence of a mcast router). Also, if switches differ in that two
> segments, then issue could be with IGMPv2 vs IGMPv3 snooping support
> in that in ring0 segment. Not all switches support IGMPv3 (linux
> default) snooping, and to be on a safest side it could be needed to
> downgrade used linux IGMP version to v2
> (/proc/sys/net/ipv4/conf/<intf>/force_igmp_version).
I have checked both networks private and public and now I'm sure that
they are have the similar settings and IGMP working fine.
After lot of digging I found that if I run Corosync daemon standalone
from Pacemaker both rings are
working fine. Netstat utility shows that corosync listen on both interfaces:
# netstat -lnup |egrep '5405|5505'
udp 0 0 111.11.11.1:5405
0.0.0.0:* 14912/corosync
udp 0 0 192.168.1.54:5505
0.0.0.0:* 14912/corosync
# corosync-cfgtool -s
Printing ring status.
Local node ID -1306941248
RING ID 0
id = 192.168.1.54
status = ring 0 active with no faults
RING ID 1
id = 111.11.11.1
status = ring 1 active with no faults
When it starts under Pacemaker - Corosync listen only on public interface.
Check with tcpdump also catching so many packets for both
ports/rings/interfaces.
So my question is - why Corosync didn't work correctly if it start under
Pacemaker?
For sure - I have no any unusual settings for pacemaker in /etc/sysconfig.
Thank you.
--
Regards Denis Gribkov
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: smime.p7s
Type: application/pkcs7-signature
Size: 3695 bytes
Desc: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
URL: <http://lists.clusterlabs.org/pipermail/users/attachments/20170306/c801fc74/attachment-0002.p7s>
More information about the Users
mailing list