Guess I forgot to edit those IP's :). I thought you could only have one default gateway on a machine. I've never needed to deal with multiple nics other than bonded. PS: What does tab 1/2 mean? Mike On Thu, 13 Mar 2008 13:39:25 -0700, Alex Kompel wrote: > Google "linux policy based routing". > > In your example you just need to setup different gateways for both > interfaces. For example: > ip route add default via 69.2.237.57 dev eth0 tab 1 > ip route add default via 192.168.1.1 dev eth1 tab 2 > > > On Thu, Mar 13, 2008 at 9:23 AM, isplist@xxxxxxxxxxxx > <isplist@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> Is there a good document somewhere which explains in not too great >> technical >> terms how to use multiple nics on a system. I've been running bonded nics >> for >> many years but getting a machine to use two (or more networks) is still a >> mystery to me. >> >> For example, I have a VoIP machine which has two nics which I have >> problems >> with because I don't understand the above yet. >> >> This machine has a nic allows incoming VoIP/ZIP connections to it's >> public IP >> address on a T1. The router blocks everything but that traffic. >> >> Then it has a second nic which has a private IP on it to allow for >> management >> of the machine. Yet recently, it lost it's DNS, it can't seem to get >> access to >> DNS on it's own. I can force it to use DNS by typing ping commands a >> couple of >> times but it cannot do it on it's own to get it's updates for example. >> >> Basically, I need the machine to see it's public gateway at xx.x.237.59 to >> route it's VoIP/SIP traffic but I also need it to see it's private >> gateway at >> 192.168.1.0 so that it can use DNS and other internal services properly. >> >> route -n >> Kernel IP routing table >> Destination Gateway Genmask Flags Metric Ref Use >> Iface >> xx.x.237.56 0.0.0.0 255.255.255.248 U 0 0 0 eth0 >> 192.168.1.0 0.0.0.0 255.255.255.0 U 0 0 0 eth1 >> 169.254.0.0 0.0.0.0 255.255.0.0 U 0 0 0 >> eth1 >> 0.0.0.0 69.2.237.57 0.0.0.0 UG 0 0 0 >> eth0 >> >> ifconfig >> eth0 Link encap:Ethernet HWaddr 00:90:27:DC:4B:E6 >> inet addr:xx.x.237.59 Bcast:69.2.237.63 Mask:255.255.255.248 >> inet6 addr: fe80::290:27ff:fedc:4be6/64 Scope:Link >> UP BROADCAST RUNNING MULTICAST MTU:1500 Metric:1 >> RX packets:33910280 errors:16 dropped:0 overruns:0 frame:16 >> TX packets:45988648 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 carrier:0 >> collisions:24746 txqueuelen:1000 >> RX bytes:681966199 (650.3 MiB) TX bytes:1657358619 (1.5 GiB) >> >> eth1 Link encap:Ethernet HWaddr 00:13:20:55:D7:CE >> inet addr:192.168.1.102 Bcast:192.168.1.255 Mask:255.255.255.0 >> inet6 addr: fe80::213:20ff:fe55:d7ce/64 Scope:Link >> UP BROADCAST RUNNING MULTICAST MTU:1500 Metric:1 >> RX packets:87417784 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 frame:0 >> TX packets:70881957 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 carrier:0 >> collisions:0 txqueuelen:1000 >> RX bytes:4171601084 (3.8 GiB) TX bytes:1547562481 (1.4 GiB) >> >> lo Link encap:Local Loopback >> inet addr:127.0.0.1 Mask:255.0.0.0 >> inet6 addr: ::1/128 Scope:Host >> UP LOOPBACK RUNNING MTU:16436 Metric:1 >> RX packets:6501004 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 frame:0 >> TX packets:6501004 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 carrier:0 >> collisions:0 txqueuelen:0 >> RX bytes:897257336 (855.6 MiB) TX bytes:897257336 (855.6 MiB) >> >> >> Mike >> >> >> On Wed, 12 Mar 2008 10:39:50 -0700, Alex Kompel wrote: >>> You will still need some way to tell the system through which >>> >>> interface you want to route outgoing packets for each target. >>> You can achieve the same with greater ease by splitting the network in >>> 2 subnets and assigning each to a single interface. >>> It all depends on the problem you are trying to solve. If you want >>> redundancy - use active-passive bonding, you want throughput - use >>> active-active bonding (if your switch supports link aggregation), if >>> you want security and isolation - use separate subnets. >>> >>> -Alex >>> >>> 2008/3/12 Brian Kroth <bpkroth@xxxxxxxx>: >>>> This is a hypothetical, but what if you have two interfaces on the >>>> same >>>> network and want to force one service IP to one interface and the >>>> other >>>> to a different interface? I think what everyone is wondering is how >>>> much control one has over the service IP placement. >>>> >>>> Thanks, >>>> Brian >>>> >>>> Finnur Örn Guðmundsson - TM Software <fog@xxxx> 2008-03-12 14:36: >>>> >>>> >>>>> Hi, >>>>> >>>>> I see no reason why you could not have 3 diffrent interfaces, each >>>>> connected to the networks you are trying to serve the NFS requests >>>>> to/from. RG Manager will add the floating interfaces to the >>>>> "correct" >>>>> interface, that is, if your floating ip is 1.2.3.4 and you have a >>>>> interface with the IP address 1.2.3.3 he will add the IP to that >>>>> interface. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Bgrds, >>>>> Finnur >>>>> >>>>> -----Original Message----- >>>>> From: linux-cluster-bounces@xxxxxxxxxx [mailto:linux-cluster- >>>>> bounces@xxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of gordan@xxxxxxxxxx >>>>> Sent: 12. mars 2008 14:10 >>>>> To: linux clustering >>>>> Subject: Re: Two node NFS cluster serving multiple >>>>> networks >>>>> >>>>> Sounds very similar to what I'm trying to achieve (see the other >>>>> thread >>>>> about binding failover resources to interfaces). I've not seen a >>>>> response >>>>> yet, so I'm most curious to see if you'll get any. >>>>> >>>>> Gordan >>>>> >>>>> On Wed, 12 Mar 2008, Randy Brown wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> I am using a two node cluster with Centos 5 with up to date >>>>>> patches. >>>>>> We have >>>>>> three different networks to which I would like to serve nfs mounts >>>>>> from this >>>>>> cluster. Can this even be done? I have interfaces available for >>>>>> each >>>>>> network in each node? >>>>>> >>>>> -- >>>>> Linux-cluster mailing list >>>>> Linux-cluster@xxxxxxxxxx >>>>> https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/linux-cluster >>>>> >>>>> -- >>>>> Linux-cluster mailing list >>>>> Linux-cluster@xxxxxxxxxx >>>>> https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/linux-cluster >>>>> >>>> -- >>>> Linux-cluster mailing list >>>> Linux-cluster@xxxxxxxxxx >>>> https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/linux-cluster >>>> >>> >>> -- >>> Linux-cluster mailing list >>> Linux-cluster@xxxxxxxxxx >>> https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/linux-cluster >> >> >> -- >> Linux-cluster mailing list >> Linux-cluster@xxxxxxxxxx >> https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/linux-cluster >> > > -- > Linux-cluster mailing list > Linux-cluster@xxxxxxxxxx > https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/linux-cluster -- Linux-cluster mailing list Linux-cluster@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/linux-cluster
