Well, that depends where his DNS servers are. If they are on, for example, 192.168.2 then DNS traffic is routed through the public interface. 2008/3/13 Bennie Thomas <Bennie_R_Thomas@xxxxxxxxxxxx>: > I never use multiple routes. can cause you some grief. Make sure your > /etc/hosts, /etc/resolv.conf, /etc/nsswitch.conf files. > I use multiple networks currently and have no problems with the traffic > going out the correct paths > > B > > > > splist@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 > -- Linux-cluster mailing list Linux-cluster@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/linux-cluster
