---------------------------------------------------------
Dennis Jacobfeuerborn wrote
/Fri Feb 10 06:47:22 EST 2012/
On 02/10/2012 12:54 AM, Bob Hoffman wrote:
>/ so I gave up on bonding.
/>/ I found about 300 posts showing eth0 and eth1 both pointing to br0 (bridge)
/>/ as interfaces.
/>/ I followed them correctly, or so I thought.
/>/ I pointed both ethx to the bridge, restarted network and bam...!!!
/
Bonding and bridging are completely different things. If you want to start
bonding then you should first start with simply bonding the two interfaces
and only once you got that going add the bridge and then add the bond0
device to it.
Regards,
Dennis
-----------------------------------------------------------
Yea, I gave up on bonding, ended up just using eth1. But every tutorial
I found had added eth0 and eth1 as interfaces to br0, thus sharing the
bridge so to speak.
All the tutorials were for debian though, all the centos ones ended up
pointing each eth to a different cridge (br0 and br1)
So I tried it....bam, took down router in less than a second.
I did not add a domain= setting in the bridge though. With network
manager off completely I thought I would not need too.
Looking at the resolv.conf it was overwritten anyway and since no domain
was listed, it said
"search belkin"
search belkin
I assume that was the datacenters router....
I was not bonding at this time. I am wondering though why the network
manager overwrites resolv.conf if NM is off, all ifcfg files say
nm_controlled=no, and chkconfig NetworkManager off was run.
It is not that way on my 5.x, but I guess things change. I wonder if
that was messing my bond experiment up too without me knowing it.
_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@xxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
