Re: [ClusterLabs] EL6, cman, rrp, unicast and iptables

2015-09-15 Thread Christine Caulfield
On 15/09/15 01:01, Digimer wrote: > On 14/09/15 10:46 AM, Noel Kuntze wrote: >> >> Hello Christine, >> >> I googled a bit and some doc[1] says that TC_PRIO_INTERACTIVE maps to value >> 6, whatever that is. >> Assuming that value of 6 is the same as the "priority value", Corosync >> traffic

Re: [ClusterLabs] EL6, cman, rrp, unicast and iptables

2015-09-15 Thread Digimer
On 15/09/15 12:10 PM, Noel Kuntze wrote: > > Hello Digimer, > >> So what's the final verdict on this? I followed your back and forth, and >> it sounds like corosync uses 0, so nothing else is to be done? > > Missing prioritization itself cannot be the cause of the problem. > Either some other

Re: [ClusterLabs] EL6, cman, rrp, unicast and iptables

2015-09-15 Thread Noel Kuntze
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 Hello Chrstine, > There are other networking scheduling algorithms, I think. Though I > haven't looked at them in detail for years now. Maybe we should > investigate and see if there is one that might be more appropriate? I'd propose recreating

Re: [ClusterLabs] EL6, cman, rrp, unicast and iptables

2015-09-15 Thread Digimer
On 15/09/15 03:20 AM, Jan Friesse wrote: > Digimer napsal(a): >> On 14/09/15 04:20 AM, Jan Friesse wrote: >>> Digimer napsal(a): Hi all, Starting a new thread from the "Clustered LVM with iptables issue" thread... I've decided to review how I do networking

Re: [ClusterLabs] EL6, cman, rrp, unicast and iptables

2015-09-14 Thread Noel Kuntze
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 Hello Christine, > I think it's worth mentioning here that corosync already sets its > packets to TC_INTERACTIVE (which DLM does not), so they should not need > too much messing around with in iptables/qdisc If that is the case, then why do the

Re: [ClusterLabs] EL6, cman, rrp, unicast and iptables

2015-09-14 Thread Christine Caulfield
On 14/09/15 12:45, Noel Kuntze wrote: > > Hello Christine, > >> I think it's worth mentioning here that corosync already sets its >> packets to TC_INTERACTIVE (which DLM does not), so they should not need >> too much messing around with in iptables/qdisc > > If that is the case, then why do the

Re: [ClusterLabs] EL6, cman, rrp, unicast and iptables

2015-09-14 Thread Noel Kuntze
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 Hello Christine, I googled a bit and some doc[1] says that TC_PRIO_INTERACTIVE maps to value 6, whatever that is. Assuming that value of 6 is the same as the "priority value", Corosync traffic should go into band 0, because TOS values of 0x10

Re: [ClusterLabs] EL6, cman, rrp, unicast and iptables

2015-09-14 Thread Noel Kuntze
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 Hello Christine, Do you have a pointer for me where to look in the source? Searching for TC_INTERACTIVE in the Corosync sources on Github yielded no results. How the scheduler handles the packets depends on the settings and type of it, so yes,

Re: [ClusterLabs] EL6, cman, rrp, unicast and iptables

2015-09-14 Thread Digimer
On 14/09/15 10:46 AM, Noel Kuntze wrote: > > Hello Christine, > > I googled a bit and some doc[1] says that TC_PRIO_INTERACTIVE maps to value > 6, whatever that is. > Assuming that value of 6 is the same as the "priority value", Corosync > traffic should go into band 0, because > TOS values of

Re: [ClusterLabs] EL6, cman, rrp, unicast and iptables

2015-09-14 Thread Digimer
On 14/09/15 04:20 AM, Jan Friesse wrote: > Digimer napsal(a): >> Hi all, >> >>Starting a new thread from the "Clustered LVM with iptables issue" >> thread... >> >>I've decided to review how I do networking entirely in my cluster. I >> make zero claims to being great at networks, so I would

Re: [ClusterLabs] EL6, cman, rrp, unicast and iptables

2015-09-14 Thread Jan Friesse
Digimer napsal(a): Hi all, Starting a new thread from the "Clustered LVM with iptables issue" thread... I've decided to review how I do networking entirely in my cluster. I make zero claims to being great at networks, so I would love some feedback. I've got three active/passive