On 01/25/2012 12:32 PM, M Siddiqui wrote:
Hi there, I have a situation where two cluster nodes are connected over the VPN; each node is configured with two interfaces to provide ring redundancy for corosync: NODE1: eth1: 192.168.1.111/24 <http://192.168.1.111/24> eth2: 192.168.1.112/24 <http://192.168.1.112/24> NODE2: eth1: 192.168.1.113/24 <http://192.168.1.113/24> eth2: 192.168.1.114/24 <http://192.168.1.114/24> corosync version 1.4.2 transport udpu (multicast has the same issue) Since two nodes are geographically distributed and connected over the VPN, configuring each interface in a different subnet is not an option here. Now corosync got confused due to same subnet; how we can handle this situation? What is the experts recommendation? Thanks in advance for the answer.
I'm pretty sure if you're doing multiple rings, they need to be on separate subnets. Question: if you're going over a single openVPN instance, you only really have one communication path between the nodes, right? In which case, redundant rings won't actually help.
Also, you probably want the discuss@xxxxxxxxxxxx list. openais@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx is deprecated, for lack of a better term.
Regards, Tim -- Tim Serong Senior Clustering Engineer SUSE tserong@xxxxxxxx _______________________________________________ discuss mailing list discuss@xxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.corosync.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
