[Spread-users] multihomed configuration problems

Eric L. Anderson ericlanderson at gmail.com
Wed Dec 8 15:44:25 EST 2004


On Wed, 8 Dec 2004 10:21:34 -0500, Jonathan Stanton
<jonathan at cnds.jhu.edu> wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> I noticed one or two specific issues that may be the cause of your
> problem with the multi-home support. I am also curious what aspects of
> Spread's performance you want to improve by moving it to a separate
> network segment? In many wackamole setups, the spread traffic is minimal
> so throughput isn't usually an issue. Can you tell us if you saw a
> particular performance problem or if you were trying to prevent future
> problems :-)

Just trying to head off any future problems :)

> 
> 
> 
> On Mon, Dec 06, 2004 at 12:38:51PM -0600, Eric L. Anderson wrote:
> > I have successfully managed getting both spread and wackamole working
> > with wackamole managing some IP's on a public network using two
> > machines. I thought I might improve the performance of spread by
> > moving the spread communication to a private network using
> > mutltihommed machines while still having wackamole manage the public
> > interfaces. I used the multihomed example from the spread.conf but
> > things are not working as I expected within spread.
> >
> > The machines in question have dual Broadcom adapters running FreeBSD
> > 5.3 and spread 3.17.2. For some reason, all I ever see in the logs is
> > the following (the public IPs have been changed to protect the
> > innocent) :
> >
> > # tail /var/log/spread.log
> > [Mon 06 Dec 2004 11:29:06] Finished configuration file.
> > [Mon 06 Dec 2004 11:29:06] Conf_init: My name: host1, id: 1.2.3.7, port: 4803
> 
> If nothing else is printed then for some reason they are not finding
> each other. You should usually see a set of lines like:
> 
>  Configuration at lothlorien is:
>  Num Segments 1
>      1       10.0.1.255        4803
>              lothlorien              10.0.1.107
>  ====================
> 
> listing the other daemons that were found.
> 
> 
> 
> >
> > And neither of the machines are communicating to each other over (even
> > though the 192.186.0  IPs are pingable from each machine.
> >
> > Here is the spread.conf for both machines:
> >
> > Spread_Segment 225.0.1.1 {
> >
> >         host1     1.2.3.7 {
> >                 D               192.168.0.2
> >                 C               1.2.3.7
> >         }
> >         host2       1.2.3.4 {
> >                 D               192.168.0.1
> >                 C               1.2.3.4
> >         }
> > }
> 
> I'm guessing you are running linux. Linux and IP Multicast have a number
> of quirks and outright annoying behaviours.

Actually, FreeBSD 5.3 as stated previously. I actually got this to
work by using the following config:

Spread_Segment 225.0.1.1 {

         host1     192.168.0.2 {
                 D               192.168.0.2
                 C               1.2.3.7
        }
         host2       192.168.0.1 {
                 D               192.168.0.1
                 C               1.2.3.4
         }
}

I just changed the IP on the hostN line to read the private IP instead
of the public IP. Now it works fine.

> >
> > Any thoughts? Is what I want to do even possible with spread and wackamole?
> 
> The Spread part is definitely possible. I'm not sure if wackamole has
> any issues with the more complicated spread setup or not.

Wackamole appears to be working in the new environment now that spread
is working again.

> 
> Cheers,
> 
> Jonathan
> 
> --
> -------------------------------------------------------
> Jonathan R. Stanton         jonathan at cs.jhu.edu
> Dept. of Computer Science
> Johns Hopkins University
> -------------------------------------------------------
>




More information about the Spread-users mailing list