Michael,
this seems to be bug. I've rewrote that code so Linux platform specific
things gone and probably didn't test your test case.
Corosync implementation of getifaddrs should return same order as
getifaddrs, if it's doing otherwise, it's bug (should be simple to fix).
I believe "best match" is not implemented even in older releases, but
seems to be good idea to have.
Regards,
Honza
Michael Chapman napsal(a):
On Tue, 22 May 2012, Dan Frincu wrote:
Best choice would have been to use the actual IP address in the config
file, rather than using the network address. This would lead to the
same effect (bind on the right IP) without having to modify code. This
is also the recommended way of doing things when having overlapping
subnets. And, yes, it will always go for the highest numerical IP it
finds.
Using the actual IP address in the config doesn't help anything.
Corosync still applies each interface address's network mask to see
whether the address matches, and 192.168.0.1/24 and 192.168.0.0/24 end
up being masked to the same thing.
Also, it's not necessarily the "highest" IP address; it will just be
whatever address comes last when enumerated by getifaddrs(). As far as I
know, getifaddrs() doesn't guarantee any ordering, so this is
potentially non-deterministic. (On Linux, it seems that the "primary" IP
address for a particular interface will always be enumerated before its
"secondary" IP addresses, however.)
So this problem still stands: there's no way to tell Corosync to bind to
a particular IP and ignore any other IPs it might see in the same
subnet. And (as my earlier Question 1 mentioned) there seem to be
certain conditions when Corosync might re-evaluate which IP to use
*whilst* it is running.
totemip_iface_check() could be modified to match on a specific IP if it
matches exactly the value from the config file, and only falling back to
"any IP in the same subnet" if that IP isn't found. Would a patch along
those lines be welcome?
- Michael
_______________________________________________
discuss mailing list
discuss@xxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.corosync.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
_______________________________________________
discuss mailing list
discuss@xxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.corosync.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
