On Wed, Mar 18, 2015 at 11:08 AM, Aaron Coburn <[email protected]> wrote:
> I'm in favor of whatever would be least confusing to users. And that > probably means waiting until a 2.4.1 release before announcing it on the > a.o mailing list. > Agree. Regarding 2.4.1, the problem discovered yesterday has been fixed in trunk. I tested a few 15-VM reservations using the code in trunk and cluster_info was correct. However, I found another problem described in https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/VCL-839. Using a slightly modified vcl-install.sh, I installed a new CentOS 6.5 VM with VCL 2.4 and then updated it with the code in trunk. I was able to create a CentOS 6.5 base image and make reservations without any problems. When I attempted to capture one of the reservations, it failed because the management node had locked itself out after the first user connection was detected. This is described ad nauseam in the Jira issue. The problem is partially due to vcl-install.sh using localhost by default as the management node name. We could change the script to use something else. Regardless, the management node name must resolve to the private IP address or problems will occur. The script should add an entry to /etc/hosts so the MN's hostname in vcld.conf and the management node table resolves to the MN's private IP address. Josh primarily developed the script but is travelling this week. I can try to address the issues with the script tomorrow. This will fix the install script but there are still problems with the code. A management node should never lock itself out. These problems can be pushed off in my opinion but we need to add to the install documentation a step to make sure the MN's hostname resolves to its private IP address. Thought? Regards, Andy
