Actually, I take it back in your example I guess you can add a static route to the network where DNS servers are and that should do it. PS: You can have multiple routing tables which are selected base on the rules (which I forgot to mention): http://lartc.org/howto/lartc.rpdb.html On Thu, Mar 13, 2008 at 1:57 PM, isplist@xxxxxxxxxxxx <isplist@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > 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 > -- Linux-cluster mailing list Linux-cluster@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/linux-cluster
