On Sunday 08 April 2007 16:46, Simon Horman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > This seems to be a bit of an easy trap to fall into. > Are there any fixes floating around? I was thinking > that perhaps a cluster id of some sort would be a good > idea. But I'm not sure.
There is a cluster ID stored in the CIB. However that is going to be copied if you copy both nodes including configuration. The ha.cf file already lists all nodes that are in the cluster via the "node" directive. Surely if a node calling itself "foo" asks to join the cluster then regardless of whether it has a suitable auth key it should not be accepted if the list of valid nodes includes no "foo". Even if you have the case of a valid node in the cluster having the wrong name due to a configuration error you can't keep a valid configuration if you allow it to join as it makes the process of determining quorum difficult. It's impossible to know whether it's a backup copy of a node or a mis-named node. Allowing a machine with the wrong name to join and then rejecting a machine with the right name because the number of nodes specified in the config file have already joined (as is currently the case) is just wrong. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
