> > On 04/16/2010 07:04 PM, Patrick Cotner wrote: > > > cl_status hblinkstatus san02 eth2 reports 'dead' from san01. > > > The interface is up and I can ping from either side. > > > I can't figure out why heartbeat thinks this interface is > > dead and I'm > > > not sure what I need to do next inorder to resolve it. > > > > > > Basic setup: > > > Heartbeat 3.0.2 on debian lenny, two nodes: san01, san02 > > > > > > +--------+ +--------+ > > > | eth1 |<--->| eth1 | > > > | san01 | | san02 | > > > | eth2 |<--->| eth2 | > > > +--------+ +--------+ > > > > > > /etc/ha.d/ha.cf: > > > use_logd on > > > debug 1 > > > autojoin none > > > bcast eth1 > > > bcast eth2 > > > initdead 30 > > > keepalive 1 > > > warntime 5 > > > deadtime 10 > > > node san01 > > > node san02 > > > crm yes > > > > > > cl_status results when issued from san01: > > > cl_status hbstatus >> Heartbeat is running on this machine. > > > cl_status listnodes >> san02 san01 cl_status > listhblinks san01 >> > > > eth2 eth1 cl_status listhblinks san02 >> eth2 eth1 cl_status > > > hblinkstatus san01 eth1 >> up cl_status hblinkstatus > san01 eth2 >> > > > up cl_status hblinkstatus san02 eth1 >> dead << this is the > > > problem cl_status hblinkstatus san02 eth2 >> up > > > > > > cl_status results when issued from san02: > > > cl_status hbstatus >> Heartbeat is running on this machine. > > > cl_status listnodes >> san02 san01 cl_status > listhblinks san01 >> > > > eth2 eth1 cl_status listhblinks san02 >> eth2 eth1 cl_status > > > hblinkstatus san01 eth1 >> up cl_status hblinkstatus > san01 eth2 >> > > > up cl_status hblinkstatus san02 eth1 >> up cl_status > hblinkstatus > > > san02 eth2 >> up > > > > > > Can anyone give me any other avenues to troubleshoot? > > > Let me know if I need to provide any more information > regarding my > > > setup. > > > > Typical cause would be a local firewall blocking incoming > UDP port 694 > > on eth1 on san01 only. > > > > Cheers, > > Florian > > > > Florian, thanks for the reply. > I don't think that's it as my iptables are completely empty on both > nodes: > > san01:~# iptables -L > Chain INPUT (policy ACCEPT) > target prot opt source destination > > Chain FORWARD (policy ACCEPT) > target prot opt source destination > > Chain OUTPUT (policy ACCEPT) > target prot opt source destination > san01:~# > ~~~~~~~~~~~ > san02:~# iptables -L > Chain INPUT (policy ACCEPT) > target prot opt source destination > > Chain FORWARD (policy ACCEPT) > target prot opt source destination > > Chain OUTPUT (policy ACCEPT) > target prot opt source destination > san02:~# > > Are there any atypical causes?
Here is the output of tcpdump on the suspect ethernet port: san01:~# tcpdump -i eth2 21:02:42.459569 IP 10.1.10.2.46836 > 10.1.10.15.694: UDP, length 208 21:02:42.850461 IP 10.1.10.1.52791 > 10.1.10.15.694: UDP, length 208 21:02:43.463612 IP 10.1.10.2.46836 > 10.1.10.15.694: UDP, length 205 21:02:43.463619 IP 10.1.10.2.46836 > 10.1.10.15.694: UDP, length 208 21:02:43.854462 IP 10.1.10.1.52791 > 10.1.10.15.694: UDP, length 208 21:02:44.054676 STP 802.1d, Config, Flags [none], bridge-id 8001.00:0b:5f:09:55:00.800e, length 43 -Patrick Cotner _______________________________________________ Linux-HA mailing list Linux-HA@lists.linux-ha.org http://lists.linux-ha.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-ha See also: http://linux-ha.org/ReportingProblems
