When I experienced this issue I did run "ifdown eth0" before trying to configure and then running "ifup bond0" as the article here: http://wiki.debian.org/Bonding suggests. Is the "ifcfg eth0 down" different than using the ifdown command? And if that is the case the documentation wiki should get updated to keep people from running into this issue.
If there are more tests or information I can provide let me know, I could run through the scenario again this week. Thanks, -Brett On Tue, Feb 19, 2013 at 8:05 AM, Guus Sliepen <g...@debian.org> wrote: > severity 698797 normal > severity 602303 normal > tags 698797 + wontfix > tags 602303 + wontfix > merge 698797 602303 > thanks > > On Wed, Jan 23, 2013 at 12:55:52PM -0600, Brett Stauner wrote: > > > This is my first bug report, so please excuse my brevity or verbosity. > > I've explained in detail my trouble here: > http://blog.mightybs.net/2013/01/adventures-in-ethernet.html > > > > When setting up bonding I followed the directions here: > http://wiki.debian.org/Bonding > > > > After getting the bond0 setup and eth0 removed from definitions I found > that the network connection > > was not working. I found an eth0 entry in the routing table, and eth0 > while being marked as a slave > > was still showing an IP address assignment in ifconfig. > > > > The only way I was able to resolve the trouble was to reboot, and then > everything seemed to be working fine. > > Yes, you should normally first completely shut down any slave interfaces > before > you bond them together. You should not need to reboot the system, you > should > have been able to manually run "ifconfig eth0 down". > > Although I could add a feature in Debian's ifenslave scripts to > automatically > deconfigure slave interfaces before they are added to the bonding device, I > won't do that, because my scripts cannot tell whether that is the right > thing > to do or not. If you have two LAN interfaces and one WAN interface, and you > accidentally configure /etc/network/interfaces to bond one LAN and one WAN > interface instead of the two LAN interfaces, then your WAN interface will > be > gone (very annoying if you are remotely administrating that box). Also, > Linux > allows addresses and routes for individual interfaces that are part of a > bonding interface, and there might be people who use that feature. > > In the case of Sean Pappalardo's bug report, there is another script which > brings up one interface to allow SSH access to provide the computer with a > key > to decrypt the harddisk. That script should be modified to bring down that > interface after use, or one should add an explicit "pre-up ifconfig eth0 > down" > to the bonding interface's stanza in /etc/network/interfaces. > > I'll leave these bugs open for now, but if there are no objections I will > close > them. > > -- > Met vriendelijke groet / with kind regards, > Guus Sliepen <g...@debian.org> >
