On 11 Oct 2014, at 1:35 am, Brian J. Murrell (brian) <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Wed, 2014-10-08 at 12:39 +1100, Andrew Beekhof wrote: >> On 8 Oct 2014, at 2:09 am, Brian J. Murrell (brian) >> <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> Given a 2 node pacemaker-1.1.10-14.el6_5.3 cluster with nodes "node5" >>> and "node6" I saw an "unknown" third node being added to the cluster, >>> but only on node5: >> >> Is either node using dhcp? > > Yes, they both are. The server is the ISC DHCP server (on EL6) and the > address pool is much more plentiful than the node count. That is all > just to say that the DHCP server serving these nodes abides by the DHCP > RFC's recommendation to allow clients to continue to use addresses they > have already been assigned when making a renewal request. And indeed, > give them the same address they had previously after a lease expiry, as > long as the pool is not constrained and address needed to satisfy a > request from a different machine. > >> I would guess node6 got a new IP address > > These nodes are using the ISC DHCP client. That DHCP client logs in the > same log (/var/log/messages) as was posted in my prior message when it > renews a lease with messages such as: > > Oct 10 05:56:19 node6 dhclient[1026]: DHCPREQUEST on eth0 to 10.14.80.6 port > 67 (xid=0x4f11c576) > Oct 10 05:56:19 node6 dhclient[1026]: DHCPACK from 10.14.80.6 (xid=0x4f11c576) > Oct 10 05:56:20 node6 dhclient[1026]: bound to 10.14.82.141 -- renewal in > 8546 seconds. > > In the logs that I pasted the messages from in my previous message, such > messages don't even exist because the nodes are not left up long enough > to even get to a lease expiry. These are tests nodes and so are > rebooted frequently. > > TL;DR: I am quite certain the node did not get a new/different address. Even the same address can be a problem. That brief window where things were getting renewed can screw up corosync. Never ever use dhcp for a cluster node. Ever. Really, never. > >> (or that corosync decided to bind to a different one) > > Bind to a different what? Address? Yes. That is what nodeid's are calculated from. Different nodeid == different address > As in binding to an address that > was not even configured on the machine? localhost is the most common one > > b. > > > > > _______________________________________________ > Pacemaker mailing list: [email protected] > http://oss.clusterlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/pacemaker > > Project Home: http://www.clusterlabs.org > Getting started: http://www.clusterlabs.org/doc/Cluster_from_Scratch.pdf > Bugs: http://bugs.clusterlabs.org
signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail
_______________________________________________ Pacemaker mailing list: [email protected] http://oss.clusterlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/pacemaker Project Home: http://www.clusterlabs.org Getting started: http://www.clusterlabs.org/doc/Cluster_from_Scratch.pdf Bugs: http://bugs.clusterlabs.org
