Slava,
please try to follow this steps:
- First, edit your config file and keep only ONE node there and try to
execute it without Asterisk/Pacemaker, ... Just pure corosync
- Take a look to netstat -anop. Is corosync bound to correct interface?
- Try to execute corosync-objctl. Can you see output like:
compatibility=whitetank
totem.version=2
totem.secauth=off
...
runtime.blackbox.dump_flight_data=no
runtime.blackbox.dump_state=no
?

- If (and only if) corosync is bound to correct interface and
corosync-objctl doesn't report error, try do the same on second node.
- If (and only if) corosync on second node is bound to correct interface
and corosync-objctl doesn't report error, add BOTH nodes to config file.
- Make sure that corosync on BOTH nodes are bound to correct interface
- If corosync is still not able to create membership (repeating messages
like:

Nov 25 17:58:09 corosync [TOTEM ] A processor joined or left the
membership and a new membership was formed.
Nov 25 17:58:11 corosync [TOTEM ] A processor failed, forming new
configuration.

), try tcpdump and see if any traffic is going on corosync port?
- Try reduce mtu (option netmtu) to something like 1000.

I believe that following (exactly) steps, we will be able to find out
what is happening.

Regards,
  Honza

Slava Bendersky napsal(a):
> Hello Honza, 
> I corrected the config, but it didn't change match. Cluster is not forming 
> properly. 
> I shutdown iptables 
> Log 
> 
> Nov 25 17:58:05 corosync [CPG ] chosen downlist: sender r(0) ip(10.10.10.1) ; 
> members(old:1 left:0) 
> Nov 25 17:58:05 corosync [MAIN ] Completed service synchronization, ready to 
> provide service. 
> Nov 25 17:58:07 corosync [TOTEM ] A processor failed, forming new 
> configuration. 
> Nov 25 17:58:08 corosync [TOTEM ] A processor joined or left the membership 
> and a new membership was formed. 
> Nov 25 17:58:08 corosync [TOTEM ] A processor failed, forming new 
> configuration. 
> Nov 25 17:58:09 corosync [TOTEM ] A processor joined or left the membership 
> and a new membership was formed. 
> Nov 25 17:58:11 corosync [TOTEM ] A processor failed, forming new 
> configuration. 
> 
> But right now I see both end members 
> 
> pbx01*CLI> corosync show members 
> 
> ============================================================= 
> === Cluster members ========================================= 
> ============================================================= 
> === 
> === Node 1 
> === --> Group: asterisk 
> === --> Address 1: 10.10.10.1 
> === Node 2 
> === --> Group: asterisk 
> === --> Address 1: 10.10.10.2 
> === 
> ============================================================= 
> 
> And this message is still flooding asterisk log. 
> 
> 2013-11-25 12:02:18] WARNING[2057]: res_corosync.c:316 ast_event_cb: CPG 
> mcast failed (6) 
> [2013-11-25 12:02:18] WARNING[2057]: res_corosync.c:316 ast_event_cb: CPG 
> mcast failed (6) 
> 
> 
> When do ping from asterisk it shows mac from eth0 and not eth3. 
> 
> pbx01*CLI> corosync ping 
> [2013-11-25 12:03:38] NOTICE[2057]: res_corosync.c:303 ast_event_cb: 
> (ast_event_cb) Got event PING from server with EID: 'mac of eth0' 
> 
> Slava. 
> 
> 
> ----- Original Message -----
> 
> From: "Jan Friesse" <[email protected]> 
> To: "Slava Bendersky" <[email protected]>, "Steven Dake" 
> <[email protected]> 
> Cc: [email protected] 
> Sent: Monday, November 25, 2013 3:10:51 AM 
> Subject: Re: [corosync] information request 
> 
> Slava Bendersky napsal(a): 
>> Hello Steven, 
>> Here testing results 
>> Iptables is stopped both end. 
>>
>> [root@eusipgw01 ~]# iptables -L -nv -x 
>> Chain INPUT (policy ACCEPT 474551 packets, 178664760 bytes) 
>> pkts bytes target prot opt in out source destination 
>>
>> Chain FORWARD (policy ACCEPT 0 packets, 0 bytes) 
>> pkts bytes target prot opt in out source destination 
>>
>> Chain OUTPUT (policy ACCEPT 467510 packets, 169303071 bytes) 
>> pkts bytes target prot opt in out source destination 
>> [root@eusipgw01 ~]# 
>>
>>
>> First case is udpu transport and rrp: none 
>>
>> totem { 
>> version: 2 
>> token: 160 
>> token_retransmits_before_loss_const: 3 
>> join: 250 
>> consensus: 300 
>> vsftype: none 
>> max_messages: 20 
>> threads: 0 
>> nodeid: 2 
>> rrp_mode: none 
>> interface { 
>> member { 
>> memberaddr: 10.10.10.1 
>> } 
> 
> ^^^ This is problem. You must define BOTH nodes (not only remote) on 
> BOTH sides. 
> 
>> ringnumber: 0 
>> bindnetaddr: 10.10.10.0 
>> mcastport: 5405 
>> } 
>> transport: udpu 
>> } 
>>
>> Error 
>>
>> Nov 24 14:25:29 corosync [MAIN ] Totem is unable to form a cluster because 
>> of an operating system or network fault. The most common cause of this 
>> message is that the local firewall is configured improperly. 
>>
> 
> This is because you defined only remote node, not the local one in 
> member(s) section(s). 
> 
> Regards, 
> Honza 
> 
>> pbx01*CLI> corosync show members 
>>
>> ============================================================= 
>> === Cluster members ========================================= 
>> ============================================================= 
>> === 
>> === 
>> ============================================================= 
>>
>>
>> And the same with rrp: passive. I think unicast is more related to some 
>> incompatibility with vmware ? Only multicast going though, bur even then it 
>> not forming completely the cluster. 
>>
>> Slava. 
>>
>> ----- Original Message ----- 
>>
>> From: "Steven Dake" <[email protected]> 
>> To: "Slava Bendersky" <[email protected]>, "Digimer" <[email protected]> 
>> Cc: [email protected] 
>> Sent: Sunday, November 24, 2013 12:01:09 PM 
>> Subject: Re: [corosync] information request 
>>
>>
>> On 11/23/2013 11:20 PM, Slava Bendersky wrote: 
>>
>>
>>
>> Hello Digimer, 
>> Here from asterisk box what I see 
>> pbx01*CLI> corosync show members 
>>
>> ============================================================= 
>> === Cluster members ========================================= 
>> ============================================================= 
>> === 
>> === Node 1 
>> === --> Group: asterisk 
>> === --> Address 1: 10.10.10.1 
>> === Node 2 
>> === --> Group: asterisk 
>> === --> Address 1: 10.10.10.2 
>> === 
>> ============================================================= 
>>
>> [2013-11-24 01:12:43] WARNING[2057]: res_corosync.c:316 ast_event_cb: CPG 
>> mcast failed (6) 
>> [2013-11-24 01:12:43] WARNING[2057]: res_corosync.c:316 ast_event_cb: CPG 
>> mcast failed (6) 
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> These errors come from asterisk via the cpg libraries because corosync 
>> cannot get a proper configuration. The first message on tihs thread contains 
>> the scenarios under which those occur. In a past log you had the error 
>> indicating a network fault. This network fault error IIRC indicates firewall 
>> is enabled. The error from asterisk is expected if your firewall is enabled. 
>> This was suggested before by Digimer, but can you confirm you totally 
>> disabled your firewall on the box (rather then just configured it as you 
>> thought was correct). 
>>
>> Turn off the firewall - which will help us eliminate that as a source of the 
>> problem. 
>>
>> Next, use UDPU mode without RRP - confirm whether that works 
>>
>> Next use UDPU _passive_ rrp mode - confirm whether that works 
>>
>> One thing at a time in each step please. 
>>
>> Regards 
>> -steve 
>>
>>
>>
>>  
>>
>> Is possible that message related to permission who running corosync or 
>> asterisk ? 
>>
>> And another point is when I send ping I see MAC address of eth0 which is 
>> default gateway and not cluster interface. 
>>
>>
>>  
>> Corosync does not use the gateway address in any of its routing 
>> calculations. Instead it physically binds to the interface specified as 
>> detailed in corosync.conf.5. By physically binding, it avoids the gateway 
>> entirely. 
>>
>> Regards 
>> -steve 
>>
>>
>> <blockquote> 
>>
>> pbx01*CLI> corosync ping 
>> [2013-11-24 01:16:54] NOTICE[2057]: res_corosync.c:303 ast_event_cb: 
>> (ast_event_cb) Got event PING from server with EID: 'MAC address of the 
>> eth0' 
>> [2013-11-24 01:16:54] WARNING[2057]: res_corosync.c:316 ast_event_cb: CPG 
>> mcast failed (6) 
>>
>>
>> Slava. 
>>
>>
>> ----- Original Message ----- 
>>
>> From: "Slava Bendersky" <[email protected]> 
>> To: "Digimer" <[email protected]> 
>> Cc: [email protected] 
>> Sent: Sunday, November 24, 2013 12:26:40 AM 
>> Subject: Re: [corosync] information request 
>>
>> Hello Digimer, 
>> I am trying find information about vmware multicast problems. But on tcpdump 
>> I see multicas traffic from remote end. I can't confirm if packet arrive as 
>> should be. 
>> Can please confirm that memberaddr: is ip address of second node ? 
>>
>> 06:05:02.408204 IP (tos 0x0, ttl 1, id 0, offset 0, flags [DF], proto UDP 
>> (17), length 221) 
>> 10.10.10.1.5404 > 226.94.1.1.5405: [udp sum ok] UDP, length 193 
>> 06:05:02.894935 IP (tos 0x0, ttl 1, id 0, offset 0, flags [DF], proto UDP 
>> (17), length 221) 
>> 10.10.10.2.5404 > 226.94.1.1.5405: [bad udp cksum 1a8c!] UDP, length 193 
>>
>>
>> Slava. 
>>
>>
>>
>> ----- Original Message ----- 
>>
>> From: "Digimer" <[email protected]> 
>> To: "Slava Bendersky" <[email protected]> 
>> Cc: [email protected] 
>> Sent: Saturday, November 23, 2013 11:54:55 PM 
>> Subject: Re: [corosync] information request 
>>
>> If I recall correctly, VMWare doesn't do multicast properly. I'm not 
>> sure though, I don't use it. 
>>
>> Try unicast with no RRP. See if that works. 
>>
>> On 23/11/13 23:16, Slava Bendersky wrote: 
>>> Hello Digimer, 
>>> All machines are rhel 6.4 based on vmware , there not physical switch 
>>> only from vmware. I set rrp to none and cluster is formed. 
>>> With this config I am getting constant error messages. 
>>>
>>> [root@eusipgw01 ~]# cat /etc/redhat-release 
>>> Red Hat Enterprise Linux Server release 6.4 (Santiago) 
>>>
>>> [root@eusipgw01 ~]# rpm -qa | grep corosync 
>>> corosync-1.4.1-15.el6.x86_64 
>>> corosynclib-1.4.1-15.el6.x86_64 
>>>
>>>
>>> [2013-11-23 22:46:20] WARNING[2057] res_corosync.c: CPG mcast failed (6) 
>>> [2013-11-23 22:46:20] WARNING[2057] res_corosync.c: CPG mcast failed (6) 
>>>
>>> iptables 
>>>
>>> -A INPUT -i eth1 -p udp -m state --state NEW -m udp --dport 5404:5407 -j 
>>> NFLOG --nflog-prefix "dmz_ext2fw: " --nflog-group 2 
>>> -A INPUT -i eth1 -m pkttype --pkt-type multicast -j NFLOG 
>>> --nflog-prefix "dmz_ext2fw: " --nflog-group 2 
>>> -A INPUT -i eth1 -m pkttype --pkt-type unicast -j NFLOG --nflog-prefix 
>>> "dmz_ext2fw: " --nflog-group 2 
>>> -A INPUT -i eth1 -p igmp -j NFLOG --nflog-prefix "dmz_ext2fw: " 
>>> --nflog-group 2 
>>> -A INPUT -j ACCEPT 
>>>
>>>
>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------ 
>>> *From: *"Digimer" <[email protected]> 
>>> *To: *"Slava Bendersky" <[email protected]> 
>>> *Cc: *[email protected] 
>>> *Sent: *Saturday, November 23, 2013 10:34:00 PM 
>>> *Subject: *Re: [corosync] information request 
>>>
>>> I don't think you ever said what OS you have. I've never had to set 
>>> anything in sysctl.conf on RHEL/CentOS 6. Did you try disabling RRP 
>>> entirely? If you have a managed switch, make sure persistent multicast 
>>> groups are enabled or try a different switch entirely. 
>>>
>>> *Something* is interrupting your network traffic. What does 
>>> iptables-save show? Are these physical or virtual machines? 
>>>
>>> The more information about your environment that you can share, the 
>>> better we can help. 
>>>
>>> On 23/11/13 22:29, Slava Bendersky wrote: 
>>>> Hello Digimer, 
>>>> As an idea, might be some settings in sysctl.conf ? 
>>>>
>>>> Slava. 
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------ 
>>>> *From: *"Slava Bendersky" <[email protected]> 
>>>> *To: *"Digimer" <[email protected]> 
>>>> *Cc: *[email protected] 
>>>> *Sent: *Saturday, November 23, 2013 10:27:22 PM 
>>>> *Subject: *Re: [corosync] information request 
>>>>
>>>> Hello Digimer, 
>>>> Yes I set to passive and selinux is disabled 
>>>>
>>>> [root@eusipgw01 ~]# sestatus 
>>>> SELinux status: disabled 
>>>> [root@eusipgw01 ~]# cat /etc/corosync/corosync.conf 
>>>> totem { 
>>>> version: 2 
>>>> token: 160 
>>>> token_retransmits_before_loss_const: 3 
>>>> join: 250 
>>>> consensus: 300 
>>>> vsftype: none 
>>>> max_messages: 20 
>>>> threads: 0 
>>>> nodeid: 2 
>>>> rrp_mode: passive 
>>>> interface { 
>>>> ringnumber: 0 
>>>> bindnetaddr: 10.10.10.0 
>>>> mcastaddr: 226.94.1.1 
>>>> mcastport: 5405 
>>>> } 
>>>> } 
>>>>
>>>> logging { 
>>>> fileline: off 
>>>> to_stderr: yes 
>>>> to_logfile: yes 
>>>> to_syslog: off 
>>>> logfile: /var/log/cluster/corosync.log 
>>>> debug: off 
>>>> timestamp: on 
>>>> logger_subsys { 
>>>> subsys: AMF 
>>>> debug: off 
>>>> } 
>>>> } 
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Slava. 
>>>>
>>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------ 
>>>> *From: *"Digimer" <[email protected]> 
>>>> *To: *"Slava Bendersky" <[email protected]> 
>>>> *Cc: *"Steven Dake" <[email protected]> , [email protected] 
>>>> *Sent: *Saturday, November 23, 2013 7:04:43 PM 
>>>> *Subject: *Re: [corosync] information request 
>>>>
>>>> First up, I'm not Steven. Secondly, did you follow Steven's 
>>>> recommendation to not use active RRP? Does the cluster form with no RRP 
>>>> at all? Is selinux enabled? 
>>>>
>>>> On 23/11/13 18:29, Slava Bendersky wrote: 
>>>>> Hello Steven, 
>>>>> In multicast it log filling with this message 
>>>>>
>>>>> Nov 24 00:26:28 corosync [TOTEM ] A processor failed, forming new 
>>>>> configuration. 
>>>>> Nov 24 00:26:28 corosync [TOTEM ] A processor joined or left the 
>>>>> membership and a new membership was formed. 
>>>>> Nov 24 00:26:31 corosync [CPG ] chosen downlist: sender r(0) 
>>>>> ip(10.10.10.1) ; members(old:2 left:0) 
>>>>> Nov 24 00:26:31 corosync [MAIN ] Completed service synchronization, 
>>>>> ready to provide service. 
>>>>>
>>>>> In uudp it not working at all. 
>>>>>
>>>>> Slava. 
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------ 
>>>>> *From: *"Digimer" <[email protected]> 
>>>>> *To: *"Slava Bendersky" <[email protected]> 
>>>>> *Cc: *"Steven Dake" <[email protected]> , [email protected] 
>>>>> *Sent: *Saturday, November 23, 2013 6:05:56 PM 
>>>>> *Subject: *Re: [corosync] information request 
>>>>>
>>>>> So multicast works with the firewall disabled? 
>>>>>
>>>>> On 23/11/13 17:28, Slava Bendersky wrote: 
>>>>>> Hello Steven, 
>>>>>> I disabled iptables and no difference, error message the same, but at 
>>>>>> least in multicast is wasn't generate the error. 
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Slava. 
>>>>>>
>>>>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------ 
>>>>>> *From: *"Digimer" <[email protected]> 
>>>>>> *To: *"Slava Bendersky" <[email protected]> , "Steven Dake" 
>>>>>> <[email protected]> 
>>>>>> *Cc: *[email protected] 
>>>>>> *Sent: *Saturday, November 23, 2013 4:37:36 PM 
>>>>>> *Subject: *Re: [corosync] information request 
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Does either mcast or unicast work if you disable the firewall? If so, 
>>>>>> then at least you know for sure that iptables is the problem. 
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The link here shows the iptables rules I use (for corosync in mcast and 
>>>>>> other apps): 
>>>>>>
>>>>>> https://alteeve.ca/w/AN!Cluster_Tutorial_2#Configuring_iptables 
>>>>>>
>>>>>> digimer 
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On 23/11/13 16:12, Slava Bendersky wrote: 
>>>>>>> Hello Steven, 
>>>>>>> Than what I see when setup through UDPU 
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Nov 23 22:08:13 corosync [MAIN ] Compatibility mode set to whitetank. 
>>>>>>> Using V1 and V2 of the synchronization engine. 
>>>>>>> Nov 23 22:08:13 corosync [TOTEM ] adding new UDPU member {10.10.10.1} 
>>>>>>> Nov 23 22:08:16 corosync [MAIN ] Totem is unable to form a cluster 
>>>>>>> because of an operating system or network fault. The most common cause 
>>>>>>> of this message is that the local firewall is configured improperly. 
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Might be missing some firewall rules ? I allowed unicast. 
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Slava. 
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------ 
>>>>>>> *From: *"Steven Dake" <[email protected]> 
>>>>>>> *To: *"Slava Bendersky" <[email protected]> 
>>>>>>> *Cc: *[email protected] 
>>>>>>> *Sent: *Saturday, November 23, 2013 10:33:31 AM 
>>>>>>> *Subject: *Re: [corosync] information request 
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On 11/23/2013 08:23 AM, Slava Bendersky wrote: 
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Hello Steven, 
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> My setup 
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> 10.10.10.1 primary server -----EoIP tunnel vpn ipsec ----- dr 
>>> server 
>>>>>>> 10.10.10.2 
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On both servers is 2 interfaces eth0 which default gw out and eth1 
>>>>>>> where corosync live. 
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Iptables: 
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> -A INPUT -i eth1 -p udp -m state --state NEW -m udp --dport 
>>>> 5404:5407 
>>>>>>> -A INPUT -i eth1 -m pkttype --pkt-type multicast 
>>>>>>> -A INPUT -i eth1 -p igmp 
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Corosync.conf 
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> totem { 
>>>>>>> version: 2 
>>>>>>> token: 160 
>>>>>>> token_retransmits_before_loss_const: 3 
>>>>>>> join: 250 
>>>>>>> consensus: 300 
>>>>>>> vsftype: none 
>>>>>>> max_messages: 20 
>>>>>>> threads: 0 
>>>>>>> nodeid: 2 
>>>>>>> rrp_mode: active 
>>>>>>> interface { 
>>>>>>> ringnumber: 0 
>>>>>>> bindnetaddr: 10.10.10.0 
>>>>>>> mcastaddr: 226.94.1.1 
>>>>>>> mcastport: 5405 
>>>>>>> } 
>>>>>>> } 
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Join message 
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> [root@eusipgw01 ~]# corosync-objctl | grep member 
>>>>>>> runtime.totem.pg.mrp.srp.members.2.ip=r(0) ip(10.10.10.2) 
>>>>>>> runtime.totem.pg.mrp.srp.members.2.join_count=1 
>>>>>>> runtime.totem.pg.mrp.srp.members.2.status=joined 
>>>>>>> runtime.totem.pg.mrp.srp.members.1.ip=r(0) ip(10.10.10.1) 
>>>>>>> runtime.totem.pg.mrp.srp.members.1.join_count=254 
>>>>>>> runtime.totem.pg.mrp.srp.members.1.status=joined 
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Is it possible that ping sends out of wrong interface ? 
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Slava, 
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I wouldn't expect so. 
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Which version? 
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Have you tried udpu instead? If not, it is preferable to multicast 
>>>>>>> unless you want absolute performance on cpg groups. In most cases the 
>>>>>>> performance difference is very small and not worth the trouble of 
>>>>>>> setting up multicast in your network. 
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Fabio had indicated rrp active mode is broken. I don't know the 
>>>>>>> details, but try passive RRP - it is actually better then active 
>>>>> IMNSHO :) 
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Regards 
>>>>>>> -steve 
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Slava. 
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------ 
>>>>>>> *From: *"Steven Dake" <[email protected]> 
>>>>>>> *To: *"Slava Bendersky" <[email protected]> , 
>>>>> [email protected] 
>>>>>>> *Sent: *Saturday, November 23, 2013 6:01:11 AM 
>>>>>>> *Subject: *Re: [corosync] information request 
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On 11/23/2013 12:29 AM, Slava Bendersky wrote: 
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Hello Everyone, 
>>>>>>> Corosync run on box with 2 Ethernet interfaces. 
>>>>>>> I am getting this message 
>>>>>>> CPG mcast failed (6) 
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Any information thank you in advance. 
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>> https://github.com/corosync/corosync/blob/master/include/corosync/corotypes.h#L84
>>>  
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> This can occur because: 
>>>>>>> a) firewall is enabled - there should be something in the logs 
>>>>>>> telling you to properly configure the firewall 
>>>>>>> b) a config change is in progress - this is a normal response, and 
>>>>>>> you should try the request again 
>>>>>>> c) a bug in the synchronization code is resulting in a blocked 
>>>>>>> unsynced cluster 
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> c is very unlikely at this point. 
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> 2 ethernet interfaces = rrp mode, bonding, or something else? 
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Digimer needs moar infos :) 
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Regards 
>>>>>>> -steve 
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> _______________________________________________ 
>>>>>>> discuss mailing list 
>>>>>>> [email protected] 
>>>>>>> http://lists.corosync.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss 
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> _______________________________________________ 
>>>>>>> discuss mailing list 
>>>>>>> [email protected] 
>>>>>>> http://lists.corosync.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss 
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> -- 
>>>>>> Digimer 
>>>>>> Papers and Projects: https://alteeve.ca/w/ 
>>>>>> What if the cure for cancer is trapped in the mind of a person without 
>>>>>> access to education? 
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> -- 
>>>>> Digimer 
>>>>> Papers and Projects: https://alteeve.ca/w/ 
>>>>> What if the cure for cancer is trapped in the mind of a person without 
>>>>> access to education? 
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> -- 
>>>> Digimer 
>>>> Papers and Projects: https://alteeve.ca/w/ 
>>>> What if the cure for cancer is trapped in the mind of a person without 
>>>> access to education? 
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________ 
>>>> discuss mailing list 
>>>> [email protected] 
>>>> http://lists.corosync.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss 
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> -- 
>>> Digimer 
>>> Papers and Projects: https://alteeve.ca/w/ 
>>> What if the cure for cancer is trapped in the mind of a person without 
>>> access to education? 
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________ 
>> discuss mailing list 
>> [email protected] 
>> http://lists.corosync.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss 
>>
> 
> 
> 

_______________________________________________
discuss mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.corosync.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss

Reply via email to