[CentOS-announce] CEBA-2012:1237 CentOS 6 corosync Update
CentOS Errata and Bugfix Advisory 2012:1237
Upstream details at : https://rhn.redhat.com/errata/RHBA-2012-1237.html
The following updated files have been uploaded and are currently
syncing to the mirrors: ( sha256sum Filename )
i386:
f29bc47ebd7aa2adb0e9de76c9065a28dde67930b17abddcd9ddd85466a94fc3
corosync-1.4.1-7.el6_3.1.i686.rpm
8d87af749bb41f1edaae19c743b83dfba5b86fcb25cc23885d2af1c97b343316
corosynclib-1.4.1-7.el6_3.1.i686.rpm
2c7241150198d54afcc9a05ffd04d8b89ccd1c66c9b7779b46a66ac297e5375c
corosynclib-devel-1.4.1-7.el6_3.1.i686.rpm
x86_64:
828f9b98cf78345dc1ab067d3e5e33321d6236822b30e1d5d1dabd46bd48da99
corosync-1.4.1-7.el6_3.1.x86_64.rpm
8d87af749bb41f1edaae19c743b83dfba5b86fcb25cc23885d2af1c97b343316
corosynclib-1.4.1-7.el6_3.1.i686.rpm
24e79def0402986d5bbe358bd13dfa37941c946e4a00371d73510e796395fae0
corosynclib-1.4.1-7.el6_3.1.x86_64.rpm
2c7241150198d54afcc9a05ffd04d8b89ccd1c66c9b7779b46a66ac297e5375c
corosynclib-devel-1.4.1-7.el6_3.1.i686.rpm
1e89c420748b7b488b84db821f0b103101f3d9638ce88de139a70cda1b25585f
corosynclib-devel-1.4.1-7.el6_3.1.x86_64.rpm
Source:
ffb6d6fce205d3c8cf49dae022383991463ca21a2f49cf258a4b42f1b1331f38
corosync-1.4.1-7.el6_3.1.src.rpm
--
Johnny Hughes
CentOS Project { http://www.centos.org/ }
irc: hughesjr, #cen...@irc.freenode.net
___
CentOS-announce mailing list
CentOS-announce@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-announce
[CentOS-virt] [Advice] CentOS6 + KVM + bonding + bridging
With the current talk on bonding, I have a few questions of my own. I'm setting up a KVM host with CentOS 6.3 x86_64 on which I'd like to attach the VMs to a bonded interface. My target setup is one where two GigE NICs are bonded and then the KVM bridge interface is attached to the bonded interface. Initially I tried to use the balance-alb mode (mode6), but had little luck (receiving traffic on the bond appeared to be non-functional from the perspective of a VM). After some reading [0] [1] - I switched the mode to balance-tlb (mode5) and hosts are now reachable. See bottom of [0] for a note on known ARP problem for bridge on a bonded interface. I'd prefer mode5 or 6 since it would balance between my slave interfaces and need not worry about 802.3ad support (mode4) on the switch this host will be connected to. But the way it seems mode 6 isn't going to work out for me. (Maybe experimenting with mode4 is the way to go.) [0] http://www.linux-kvm.org/page/HOWTO_BONDING [1] https://lists.linux-foundation.org/pipermail/bridge/2007-April/005376.html My question to the members of this list is what bonding mode(s) are you using for a high availability setup? I welcome any advice/tips/gotchas on bridging to a bonded interface. Thanks! ---~~.~~--- Mike // SilverTip257 // ___ CentOS-virt mailing list CentOS-virt@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-virt
Re: [CentOS-virt] [Advice] CentOS6 + KVM + bonding + bridging
On 09/06/2012 12:19 PM, SilverTip257 wrote: My question to the members of this list is what bonding mode(s) are you using for a high availability setup? I welcome any advice/tips/gotchas on bridging to a bonded interface. I'm not sure I'd call this high availability... but here's an example of bonding two ethernet ports (eth0 and eth1) together into a bond (mode 4) and then setting up a bridge for a VLAN (id 375) that some VMs can run on: [root@kvm01a network-scripts]# grep -iv hwadd ifcfg-eth0 DEVICE=eth0 SLAVE=yes MASTER=bond0 [root@kvm01a network-scripts]# grep -iv hwadd ifcfg-eth1 DEVICE=eth1 SLAVE=yes MASTER=bond0 [root@kvm01a network-scripts]# cat ifcfg-bond0 | sed 's/[1-9]/x/g' DEVICE=bond0 ONBOOT=yes BOOTPROTO=static IPADDR=x0.xxx.xx.xx NETMASK=xxx.xxx.xxx.0 DNSx=xx0.xxx.xxx.xxx DNSx=x0.xxx.xx.xx DNSx=x0.xxx.xx.x0 [root@kvm01a network-scripts]# cat ifcfg-br375 DEVICE=br375 BOOTPROTO=none TYPE=Bridge ONBOOT=yes [root@kvm01a network-scripts]# cat ifcfg-bond0.375 DEVICE=bond0.375 BOOTPROTO=none ONBOOT=yes VLAN=yes BRIDGE=br375 [root@kvm01a network-scripts]# cat /etc/modprobe.d/local.conf alias bond0 bonding options bonding mode=4 miimon=100 [root@kvm01a network-scripts]# grep Mode /proc/net/bonding/bond0 Bonding Mode: IEEE 802.3ad Dynamic link aggregation [root@kvm01a network-scripts]# egrep '^V|375' /proc/net/vlan/config VLAN Dev name| VLAN ID bond0.375 | 375 | bond0 Repeat ad nauseam for the other VLANs you want to put VMs on (assuming your switch is trunking them to your hypervisor). See also http://backdrift.org/howtonetworkbonding via http://irclog.perlgeek.de/crimsonfu/2012-08-15#i_5900501 Phil ___ CentOS-virt mailing list CentOS-virt@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-virt
Re: [CentOS-es] Servidor de Email
Hector y Tito.. buen dúo para configurar un correo... Creo que lo primero que hay que pensar es que servidor de correo queres, Sendmail, Postfix, qmail, zimbra, exim, etc. Luego que definas que servidor de correo queres, que de eso depende mucho para que lo queres y con que herramientas queres que se integre.. podes recien ponerte a buscar algun manual de instalacion de ese servicio de correo en centos. Salu2 El 4 de septiembre de 2012 21:37, Héctor Herrera hherre...@gmail.comescribió: Un poco de Google no le hace mal a nadie... http://www.alcancelibre.org/staticpages/index.php/15-como-sendmail-apendice-02 El 4 de septiembre de 2012 16:21, tit...@gmail.com tit...@gmail.com escribió: Buenas Tardes, Tengo q hacer una instalacion de un servidor CentOS 6.0 con Correo Electronico Si alguien tiene algun manual de instalacion y configuracion a la mano Gracias Roberto ___ CentOS-es mailing list CentOS-es@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-es -- Saludos *Héctor Herrera Anabalón* Egresado ICCI UNAP Servicio Arquitectura y Oficina Técnica Galatea - http://www.galatea.cl Miembro USoLIX Victoria Registered User #548600 (LinuxCounter.net) +56983118902 ___ CentOS-es mailing list CentOS-es@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-es ___ CentOS-es mailing list CentOS-es@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-es
Re: [CentOS-es] Servidor de Email
Buenos días Azu, de esos que mencionas cual tu en lo personal recomiendas en base a tu experiencia? saludos, EO El 6 de septiembre de 2012 09:40, Azu Carlitox elazucarli...@gmail.comescribió: Hector y Tito.. buen dúo para configurar un correo... Creo que lo primero que hay que pensar es que servidor de correo queres, Sendmail, Postfix, qmail, zimbra, exim, etc. Luego que definas que servidor de correo queres, que de eso depende mucho para que lo queres y con que herramientas queres que se integre.. podes recien ponerte a buscar algun manual de instalacion de ese servicio de correo en centos. Salu2 El 4 de septiembre de 2012 21:37, Héctor Herrera hherre...@gmail.com escribió: Un poco de Google no le hace mal a nadie... http://www.alcancelibre.org/staticpages/index.php/15-como-sendmail-apendice-02 El 4 de septiembre de 2012 16:21, tit...@gmail.com tit...@gmail.com escribió: Buenas Tardes, Tengo q hacer una instalacion de un servidor CentOS 6.0 con Correo Electronico Si alguien tiene algun manual de instalacion y configuracion a la mano Gracias Roberto ___ CentOS-es mailing list CentOS-es@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-es -- Saludos *Héctor Herrera Anabalón* Egresado ICCI UNAP Servicio Arquitectura y Oficina Técnica Galatea - http://www.galatea.cl Miembro USoLIX Victoria Registered User #548600 (LinuxCounter.net) +56983118902 ___ CentOS-es mailing list CentOS-es@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-es ___ CentOS-es mailing list CentOS-es@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-es -- Saludos, Eddy Olivo Skype: eddyolivo FB: http://www.facebook.com/eddyolivo twitrer: @eddyolivo https://twitter.com/#!/eddyolivo ___ CentOS-es mailing list CentOS-es@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-es
Re: [CentOS-es] Servidor de Email
Lo mas facil, simple y bonito. Zimbra OpenSource. El 4 de septiembre de 2012 17:21, tit...@gmail.com tit...@gmail.comescribió: Buenas Tardes, Tengo q hacer una instalacion de un servidor CentOS 6.0 con Correo Electronico Si alguien tiene algun manual de instalacion y configuracion a la mano Gracias Roberto ___ CentOS-es mailing list CentOS-es@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-es -- Carlos Francisco Tirado Elgueta Google Apps Partner Chile http://www.chilemedios.cl ___ CentOS-es mailing list CentOS-es@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-es
Re: [CentOS-es] Servidor de Email
Depende tambien de las caracteristicas de tus servidores, zimbra es consumidor de recursos, pero indudablemente supera en muchas cosas al resto. -- Eduardo Piña Fonseca NetAdmin Fac Matemática-Computación Universidad de Oriente -- 10 de octubre del 2012: Aniversario 65 de la UO http://simbolodevida.uniblog.uo.edu.cu -- Proximos eventos: *- CIIME 2012. Ingenieria Mecanica y Energia. Noviembre 2012. http://eventos.uo.edu.cu/?p=190 *- I Congreso Integracionista de las Ciencias y las Tecnologias Informaticas. Marzo 2013 http://eventos.uo.edu.cu/?p=211 *- VIII Encuentro Internacional Ciudad, Imagen y Memoria. Mayo 2013. http://eventos.uo.edu.cu/?p=225 -- ___ CentOS-es mailing list CentOS-es@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-es
Re: [CentOS-es] Servidor de Email
http://roundcube.net/download Este webmail lo ocupo en el trabajo. Es bonito. Y parece ser de esas instalaciones que se hacen a través de una plataforma Web, asumo que un Apache, por ejemplo, y debería bastar... Ahora, como dijeron anteriormente, necesitas ver qué tiene que hacer tu servidor de correo. No especificas ese detalle. Sin eso no podemos ayudarte mayormente, porque existen 2587093475 alternativas de webmail, servidores de correo, y más... El 6 de septiembre de 2012 09:57, Eduardo Piña Fonseca edua...@csd.uo.edu.cu escribió: Depende tambien de las caracteristicas de tus servidores, zimbra es consumidor de recursos, pero indudablemente supera en muchas cosas al resto. -- Eduardo Piña Fonseca NetAdmin Fac Matemática-Computación Universidad de Oriente -- 10 de octubre del 2012: Aniversario 65 de la UO http://simbolodevida.uniblog.uo.edu.cu -- Proximos eventos: *- CIIME 2012. Ingenieria Mecanica y Energia. Noviembre 2012. http://eventos.uo.edu.cu/?p=190 *- I Congreso Integracionista de las Ciencias y las Tecnologias Informaticas. Marzo 2013 http://eventos.uo.edu.cu/?p=211 *- VIII Encuentro Internacional Ciudad, Imagen y Memoria. Mayo 2013. http://eventos.uo.edu.cu/?p=225 -- ___ CentOS-es mailing list CentOS-es@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-es -- Saludos *Héctor Herrera Anabalón* Egresado ICCI UNAP Servicio Arquitectura y Oficina Técnica Galatea - http://www.galatea.cl Miembro USoLIX Victoria Registered User #548600 (LinuxCounter.net) +56983118902 ___ CentOS-es mailing list CentOS-es@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-es
Re: [CentOS-es] Servidor de Email
iredmail.org Saludos. On 9/6/12 11:07 AM, Héctor Herrera wrote: http://roundcube.net/download Este webmail lo ocupo en el trabajo. Es bonito. Y parece ser de esas instalaciones que se hacen a través de una plataforma Web, asumo que un Apache, por ejemplo, y debería bastar... Ahora, como dijeron anteriormente, necesitas ver qué tiene que hacer tu servidor de correo. No especificas ese detalle. Sin eso no podemos ayudarte mayormente, porque existen 2587093475 alternativas de webmail, servidores de correo, y más... El 6 de septiembre de 2012 09:57, Eduardo Piña Fonseca edua...@csd.uo.edu.cu escribió: Depende tambien de las caracteristicas de tus servidores, zimbra es consumidor de recursos, pero indudablemente supera en muchas cosas al resto. -- Eduardo Piña Fonseca NetAdmin Fac Matemática-Computación Universidad de Oriente -- 10 de octubre del 2012: Aniversario 65 de la UO http://simbolodevida.uniblog.uo.edu.cu -- Proximos eventos: *- CIIME 2012. Ingenieria Mecanica y Energia. Noviembre 2012. http://eventos.uo.edu.cu/?p=190 *- I Congreso Integracionista de las Ciencias y las Tecnologias Informaticas. Marzo 2013 http://eventos.uo.edu.cu/?p=211 *- VIII Encuentro Internacional Ciudad, Imagen y Memoria. Mayo 2013. http://eventos.uo.edu.cu/?p=225 -- ___ CentOS-es mailing list CentOS-es@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-es ___ CentOS-es mailing list CentOS-es@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-es
Re: [CentOS-es] Servidor de Email
El 04/09/12, tit...@gmail.com tit...@gmail.com escribió: Buenas Tardes, Tengo q hacer una instalacion de un servidor CentOS 6.0 con Correo Electronico Si alguien tiene algun manual de instalacion y configuracion a la mano Hola si hay manuales y wiki y más cosas: Te recomiendo postfix, creo que en CentOS 6 es el MTA por defecto http://www.postfix.org/documentation.html Para IMAP y POP3: http://www.dovecot.org/documentation.html Enviar y recibir correos lo puedes hacer via web: http://squirrelmail.org/documentation/ Y esto último te puede ayudar también, incluso más que los de arriba: http://goo.gl/T3aKk, suerte :) Gracias Roberto ___ CentOS-es mailing list CentOS-es@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-es -- Live free or die! ___ CentOS-es mailing list CentOS-es@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-es
Re: [CentOS-es] Servidor de Email
2012/9/6 Roberto Alvarado ralvar...@gtdbox.com iredmail.org Saludos. Como dice Roberto Alvarado, iRedmail es tu opción más rápida y la más fácil. -- Carlos Sura.- www.carlossura.com www.carlossura.com/blog ___ CentOS-es mailing list CentOS-es@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-es
[CentOS] CentOS-announce Digest, Vol 91, Issue 3
Send CentOS-announce mailing list submissions to
centos-annou...@centos.org
To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-announce
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
centos-announce-requ...@centos.org
You can reach the person managing the list at
centos-announce-ow...@centos.org
When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
than Re: Contents of CentOS-announce digest...
Today's Topics:
1. CESA-2012:1236 Important CentOS 5 xen Update (Johnny Hughes)
2. CESA-2012:1235 Important CentOS 5 kvm Update (Johnny Hughes)
3. CESA-2012:1234 Important CentOS 6 qemu-kvm Update (Johnny Hughes)
4. CEBA-2012:1237 CentOS 6 corosync Update (Johnny Hughes)
--
Message: 1
Date: Wed, 5 Sep 2012 17:58:14 +
From: Johnny Hughes joh...@centos.org
Subject: [CentOS-announce] CESA-2012:1236 Important CentOS 5 xen
Update
To: centos-annou...@centos.org
Message-ID: 20120905175814.ga8...@chakra.karan.org
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
CentOS Errata and Security Advisory 2012:1236 Important
Upstream details at : https://rhn.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2012-1236.html
The following updated files have been uploaded and are currently
syncing to the mirrors: ( sha256sum Filename )
i386:
5f527b87a420bdd8600f85baa01da7ad1b6b0ff73c8c5d307066183b63ffbb71
xen-3.0.3-135.el5_8.5.i386.rpm
0b3ecb901a2466e3b84d80478de76b2a3462f62e6417bc24c8f2770fa5a631b3
xen-devel-3.0.3-135.el5_8.5.i386.rpm
6e4efa301b2ed154c20cc8c21f6b65c4052d06c261e992d6f96304ae90ce713b
xen-libs-3.0.3-135.el5_8.5.i386.rpm
x86_64:
3125295773f59791cef55f7f69f768984786d2cdd08f2fc34549856601d51ea6
xen-3.0.3-135.el5_8.5.x86_64.rpm
0b3ecb901a2466e3b84d80478de76b2a3462f62e6417bc24c8f2770fa5a631b3
xen-devel-3.0.3-135.el5_8.5.i386.rpm
da2028fe53b51cbf43e0505acab6c09162f200f88d8e4ecfafa31bbf542c08cf
xen-devel-3.0.3-135.el5_8.5.x86_64.rpm
6e4efa301b2ed154c20cc8c21f6b65c4052d06c261e992d6f96304ae90ce713b
xen-libs-3.0.3-135.el5_8.5.i386.rpm
1048f45a8c9b1a58434e3a6a1af81f0b2b17d33b1eea7efaaf811ddaab873ffa
xen-libs-3.0.3-135.el5_8.5.x86_64.rpm
Source:
b9e07bc5e9ab630becbd4853f140ba2451040d481b7a56a158bf847a1f31e87d
xen-3.0.3-135.el5_8.5.src.rpm
--
Johnny Hughes
CentOS Project { http://www.centos.org/ }
irc: hughesjr, #cen...@irc.freenode.net
--
Message: 2
Date: Wed, 5 Sep 2012 18:11:48 +
From: Johnny Hughes joh...@centos.org
Subject: [CentOS-announce] CESA-2012:1235 Important CentOS 5 kvm
Update
To: centos-annou...@centos.org
Message-ID: 20120905181148.ga9...@chakra.karan.org
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
CentOS Errata and Security Advisory 2012:1235 Important
Upstream details at : https://rhn.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2012-1235.html
The following updated files have been uploaded and are currently
syncing to the mirrors: ( sha256sum Filename )
x86_64:
99cd0c249b6add7c42a5ef6c6db04b86719d8fa81367dadc68ecb1e39eae9e05
kmod-kvm-83-249.el5.centos.5.x86_64.rpm
32aefa3953d7e50a5253abc7ee4a4586723af3cda0b081f01922208e26328772
kmod-kvm-debug-83-249.el5.centos.5.x86_64.rpm
4daf2560ea543f25d1fe81b13680d5a30e7526a70d5bd152fc738d2a013b656e
kvm-83-249.el5.centos.5.x86_64.rpm
878dd8358d91e9938ca7acebe07a6d4b4b9b961bf370ed734bb672c5600cdb93
kvm-qemu-img-83-249.el5.centos.5.x86_64.rpm
c3fd8d87d02d29f560a47278c40de33a02d11a7bd3c0f3afadd558bacbe59dfb
kvm-tools-83-249.el5.centos.5.x86_64.rpm
Source:
267107211e17d54dbbfb03d415676811fa2d5b4ee3b552175b5d33ec887fa807
kvm-83-249.el5.centos.5.src.rpm
--
Johnny Hughes
CentOS Project { http://www.centos.org/ }
irc: hughesjr, #cen...@irc.freenode.net
--
Message: 3
Date: Wed, 5 Sep 2012 18:27:02 +
From: Johnny Hughes joh...@centos.org
Subject: [CentOS-announce] CESA-2012:1234 Important CentOS 6 qemu-kvm
Update
To: centos-annou...@centos.org
Message-ID: 20120905182702.ga9...@chakra.karan.org
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
CentOS Errata and Security Advisory 2012:1234 Important
Upstream details at : https://rhn.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2012-1234.html
The following updated files have been uploaded and are currently
syncing to the mirrors: ( sha256sum Filename )
x86_64:
530c00a0ba0624dc0cde151b265eacd0946bd318e298f24ebf5b83cc76e47996
qemu-guest-agent-0.12.1.2-2.295.el6_3.2.x86_64.rpm
22ac39e65adbab52d21fb9ee7996c65a4820c9c80091198cc5b9692cd2a6c0c9
qemu-img-0.12.1.2-2.295.el6_3.2.x86_64.rpm
148644e0f0f2a99bccb0132e185442d2dfe3a75fbbd94cf3f1abdeaa56fc1e0a
qemu-kvm-0.12.1.2-2.295.el6_3.2.x86_64.rpm
2057e9ef1ef170d687c61ebcea79caae16ed18f17cd77b996f92626b9f81da89
qemu-kvm-tools-0.12.1.2-2.295.el6_3.2.x86_64.rpm
Source:
dc2a740d9ba887eed1d3e634a9c307ec2bdcfc3823d24fe6b53ff33e5fe6fa94
qemu-kvm-0.12.1.2-2.295.el6_3.2.src.rpm
--
Johnny Hughes
CentOS Project {
Re: [CentOS] Simple routing question
I am still having some difficulty understanding what is going on with routing on 192.168.x.x. I have removed the IP aliases from the gateway eth1 so that it only responds to aaa.bbb.ccc.1. I have changed the netmask on Host B eth1 [192.168.209.43] to 255.255.0.0 and set its gateway to aaa.bbb.ccc.1; as I have on all of the guests that have eth1 active. The network service on both hosts and guests has been restarted. However, when I do a traceroute from Host C [aaa.bbb.ccc.25] to 192.168.209.43 it still goes directly to the gateway at aaa.bbb.ccc.1 and thence out to the eth0 i/f on the gateway, where it dies as before. I note that Host C is a xen virtual host (used for some experiments several years ago but no longer hosting any active guests) and that it has the following virtual interface: 5: virbr0: BROADCAST,MULTICAST,UP,LOWER_UP mtu 1500 qdisc noqueue link/ether 00:00:00:00:00:00 brd ff:ff:ff:ff:ff:ff inet 192.168.122.1/24 brd 192.168.122.255 scope global virbr0 This has an address in the same network as 192.168.209.43 but with a different netmask. This seems to eb the case on the kvm virtual hosts as well. 6: virbr0: BROADCAST,MULTICAST,UP,LOWER_UP mtu 1500 qdisc noqueue state UNKNOWN link/ether 52:54:00:a6:3f:49 brd ff:ff:ff:ff:ff:ff inet 192.168.122.1/24 brd 192.168.122.255 scope global virbr0 So, is this the source of the problem when I try and connect to 192.168.209.43? Is the netblock 192.168.255.255 constrained to use a netmask of 255.255.255.0 because of its use by the virtual hosts? -- *** E-Mail is NOT a SECURE channel *** James B. Byrnemailto:byrn...@harte-lyne.ca Harte Lyne Limited http://www.harte-lyne.ca 9 Brockley Drive vox: +1 905 561 1241 Hamilton, Ontario fax: +1 905 561 0757 Canada L8E 3C3 ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
[CentOS] centos email server suddenly much slower. What to do?
Greetings, I run my own email server for some domains I administer, on a centos vps server with a very small number of users. The only services are smtp, imap/pop, webmail Everything was running without problems until this morning. I left home for 1/2 hours, and when I came back everything had become about 100x slower (seriously!). The services were/are still all up and running, but practically unusable (even running mutt in my ssh session is almost frozen). I have not changed/updated anything in the last 1/2 weeks. I have already done a few checks with the VPS provider, and it looks like: network hardware are OK there seem to be no strange processes running. I didn't manage to save the output of top, but it didn't show anything that (AFAICT, of course) should not be there on an email server however, there is something that is using much more memory than normal (see the comment below from the hosting sysadmin after he checked user_beancounters). Initially we thought it was apache, but even switching it off didn't change anything. What now? Any help to understand what the heck happened, and find out what exactly _started_ to cause this problem is very welcome! TIA, Marco root@vps [/etc/sysconfig]# cat /proc/user_beancounters Version: 2.5 uid resource held maxheld barrierlimit failcnt 712: kmemsize 17208298162267136 2147483646 21474836460 lockedpages 08 99 990 privvmpages 64694 262143 262144 262144 40 shmpages 14 2366 131072 1310720 dummy 00 000 numproc63 237 99 990 physpages 79977 262204 0 2621440 vmguarpages 00 131072 21474836470 oomguarpages3026144087 131072 21474836470 numtcpsock 31 243 792 7920 numflock9 20 99 990 numpty 11 50 500 numsiginfo 0 27 99 990 tcpsndbuf 545000 7915960 2147481603967744000 tcprcvbuf 507904 3981312 2147481603967744000 othersockbuf21832 1229736 2147481603967744000 dgramrcvbuf 0 118400 2147481603967744000 numothersock 56 356 792 7920 dcachesize 10775271154640329 2147483646 21474836460 numfile 772 1155 2376 23760 dummy 00 000 dummy 00 000 dummy 00 000 numiptent 57 57 99 990 As you can see, there are some fails for the privvmpages. This means your VPS tried to use more RAM than what is available (e.g. more than 1GB RAM). If you are only running some basic mail services on your VPS, that's definitely not normal and you should investigate that accordingly. We have fully checked everything for hardware and network problems and everything is working flawlessly. In combination with the RAM shortage errors, it is safe to conclude that there's something within your VPS itself that's malfunctioning. ___
Re: [CentOS] centos email server suddenly much slower. What to do?
On Thu, Sep 6, 2012 at 12:14 PM, Marco Fioretti marco.fiore...@gmail.com wrote: Greetings, I run my own email server for some domains I administer, on a centos vps server with a very small number of users. The only services are smtp, imap/pop, webmail Everything was running without problems until this morning. I left home for 1/2 hours, and when I came back everything had become about 100x slower (seriously!). The services were/are still all up and running, but practically unusable (even running mutt in my ssh session is almost frozen). I have not changed/updated anything in the last 1/2 weeks. I have already done a few checks with the VPS provider, and it looks like: network hardware are OK there seem to be no strange processes running. I didn't manage to save the output of top, but it didn't show anything that (AFAICT, of course) should not be there on an email server however, there is something that is using much more memory than normal (see the comment below from the hosting sysadmin after he checked user_beancounters). Initially we thought it was apache, but even switching it off didn't change anything. What now? Any help to understand what the heck happened, and find out what exactly _started_ to cause this problem is very welcome! One thing to check is that the DNS servers in /etc/resolv.conf are answering quickly (dig some_name.domain @server_ip). Mail services use DNS extensively and if the first server fails there is a timeout before trying the 2nd choice. Things will still work but slower and you may end up with enough processes running to run out of RAM and start swapping. Also check your outbound mail queue in case some spam attempt has succeeded in generating bounces. -- Les Mikesell lesmikes...@gmail.com ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Simple routing question
On Thu, Sep 6, 2012 at 11:11 AM, James B. Byrne byrn...@harte-lyne.ca wrote: I am still having some difficulty understanding what is going on with routing on 192.168.x.x. I have removed the IP aliases from the gateway eth1 so that it only responds to aaa.bbb.ccc.1. I have changed the netmask on Host B eth1 [192.168.209.43] to 255.255.0.0 and set its gateway to aaa.bbb.ccc.1; as I have on all of the guests that have eth1 active. The network service on both hosts and guests has been restarted. However, when I do a traceroute from Host C [aaa.bbb.ccc.25] to 192.168.209.43 it still goes directly to the gateway at aaa.bbb.ccc.1 and thence out to the eth0 i/f on the gateway, where it dies as before. I note that Host C is a xen virtual host (used for some experiments several years ago but no longer hosting any active guests) and that it has the following virtual interface: 5: virbr0: BROADCAST,MULTICAST,UP,LOWER_UP mtu 1500 qdisc noqueue link/ether 00:00:00:00:00:00 brd ff:ff:ff:ff:ff:ff inet 192.168.122.1/24 brd 192.168.122.255 scope global virbr0 This has an address in the same network as 192.168.209.43 but with a different netmask. This seems to eb the case on the kvm virtual hosts as well. 6: virbr0: BROADCAST,MULTICAST,UP,LOWER_UP mtu 1500 qdisc noqueue state UNKNOWN link/ether 52:54:00:a6:3f:49 brd ff:ff:ff:ff:ff:ff inet 192.168.122.1/24 brd 192.168.122.255 scope global virbr0 So, is this the source of the problem when I try and connect to 192.168.209.43? Is the netblock 192.168.255.255 constrained to use a netmask of 255.255.255.0 because of its use by the virtual hosts? A 'route -n' should show you where any destination will head on the next hop. On host C, what is the line with the smallest matching destination/mask? Likewise, on the gateway host where you think it is being forwarded the wrong way? -- Les Mikesell lesmikes...@gmail.com ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] centos email server suddenly much slower. What to do?
One thing to check is that the DNS servers in /etc/resolv.conf are answering quickly (dig some_name.domain @server_ip). The server runs no DNS server itself. I ran dig www.google.it @213.179.193.200 (ie the complete real IP of my primary dns server as listed in /etc/resolv.conf) and this is the result: [root@vps728 ~]# dig www.google.it @213.179.193.200 ; DiG 9.2.4 www.google.it @213.179.193.200 ; (1 server found) ;; global options: printcmd ;; Got answer: ;; -HEADER- opcode: QUERY, status: NOERROR, id: 37012 ;; flags: qr rd ra; QUERY: 1, ANSWER: 3, AUTHORITY: 4, ADDITIONAL: 0 ;; QUESTION SECTION: ;www.google.it. IN A ;; ANSWER SECTION: www.google.it. 300 IN A 173.194.35.151 www.google.it. 300 IN A 173.194.35.152 www.google.it. 300 IN A 173.194.35.159 ;; AUTHORITY SECTION: google.it. 10800 IN NS ns2.google.com. google.it. 10800 IN NS ns3.google.com. google.it. 10800 IN NS ns4.google.com. google.it. 10800 IN NS ns1.google.com. ;; Query time: 2011 msec ;; SERVER: 213.179.193.200#53(213.179.193.200) ;; WHEN: Thu Sep 6 13:41:43 2012 ;; MSG SIZE rcvd: 161 as far as the queue goes, it was empty. I run postsuper -d ALL and postuper -d ALL deferred, just in case, but no change Thanks, Marco ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] centos email server suddenly much slower. What to do?
On 09/06/2012 01:58 PM, Marco Fioretti wrote: 2011 msec Pretty slow my dig to the same server ran in 113 msec dig www.google.it @213.179.193.200 ; DiG 9.7.4-P1-RedHat-9.7.4-2.P1.fc14 www.google.it @213.179.193.200 ;; global options: +cmd ;; Got answer: ;; -HEADER- opcode: QUERY, status: NOERROR, id: 17288 ;; flags: qr rd ra; QUERY: 1, ANSWER: 3, AUTHORITY: 4, ADDITIONAL: 0 ;; QUESTION SECTION: ;www.google.it. IN A ;; ANSWER SECTION: www.google.it. 230 IN A 173.194.35.152 www.google.it. 230 IN A 173.194.35.159 www.google.it. 230 IN A 173.194.35.151 ;; AUTHORITY SECTION: google.it. 10079 IN NS ns3.google.com. google.it. 10079 IN NS ns4.google.com. google.it. 10079 IN NS ns1.google.com. google.it. 10079 IN NS ns2.google.com. ;; Query time: 113 msec ;; SERVER: 213.179.193.200#53(213.179.193.200) ;; WHEN: Thu Sep 6 14:07:38 2012 ;; MSG SIZE rcvd: 161 -- Stephen Clark *NetWolves* Director of Technology Phone: 813-579-3200 Fax: 813-882-0209 Email: steve.cl...@netwolves.com http://www.netwolves.com ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Simple routing question
Per: Les Mikesell lesmikesell at gmail.com Thu Sep 6 13:55:05 EDT 2012 A 'route -n' should show you where any destination will head on the next hop. On host C, what is the line with the smallest matching destination/mask? Likewise, on the gateway host where you think it is being forwarded the wrong way? $ /sbin/route -n Kernel IP routing table Destination Gateway Genmask Flags Metric Ref Use Iface 192.168.122.0 0.0.0.0 255.255.255.0 U 0 0 0 virbr0 aaa.bbb.ccc.00.0.0.0255.255.255.0 U 0 0 0 bridge0 169.254.0.0 0.0.0.0 255.255.0.0 U 0 0 0 bridge0 0.0.0.0 aaa.1bbb.ccc.1 0.0.0.0 UG0 0 0 bridge0 $ traceroute 192.168.209.43 traceroute to 192.168.209.43 (192.168.209.43), 30 hops max, 40 byte packets 1 gway01 (aaa.bbb.ccc.1) 0.321 ms 0.298 ms 0.283 ms 2 ISPlink (aaa.bbb.ddd.53) 1.000 ms 0.993 ms 1.450 ms 3 * * * 4 * * * 5 * * * . . . This seems to say that 192.168.209.43 is being routed out to the Internet as aaa.bbb.ddd.53 is our external gateway address on the router. This is the routing table on the router: [root@gway01 ~]# route -n Kernel IP routing table Destination Gateway Genmask Flags Metric Ref Use Iface aaa.bbb.ddd.52 0.0.0.0 255.255.255.252 U 0 0 0 eth0 aaa.bbb.ccc.0 0.0.0.0 255.255.255.0 U 0 0 0 eth1 169.254.0.0 0.0.0.0 255.255.0.0 U 1002 0 0 eth0 169.254.0.0 0.0.0.0 255.255.0.0 U 1003 0 0 eth1 0.0.0.0 aaa.bbb.ddd.53 0.0.0.0 UG0 0 0 eth0 -- *** E-Mail is NOT a SECURE channel *** James B. Byrnemailto:byrn...@harte-lyne.ca Harte Lyne Limited http://www.harte-lyne.ca 9 Brockley Drive vox: +1 905 561 1241 Hamilton, Ontario fax: +1 905 561 0757 Canada L8E 3C3 ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Simple routing question
On Thu, Sep 6, 2012 at 1:09 PM, James B. Byrne byrn...@harte-lyne.ca wrote: A 'route -n' should show you where any destination will head on the next hop. On host C, what is the line with the smallest matching destination/mask? Likewise, on the gateway host where you think it is being forwarded the wrong way? $ /sbin/route -n Kernel IP routing table Destination Gateway Genmask Flags Metric Ref Use Iface 192.168.122.0 0.0.0.0 255.255.255.0 U 0 0 0 virbr0 aaa.bbb.ccc.00.0.0.0255.255.255.0 U 0 0 0 bridge0 169.254.0.0 0.0.0.0 255.255.0.0 U 0 0 0 bridge0 0.0.0.0 aaa.1bbb.ccc.1 0.0.0.0 UG0 0 0 bridge0 $ traceroute 192.168.209.43 traceroute to 192.168.209.43 (192.168.209.43), 30 hops max, 40 byte packets 1 gway01 (aaa.bbb.ccc.1) 0.321 ms 0.298 ms 0.283 ms OK, there is no better match than the default in the route table above, so it goes to the default gateway. I assume that's what you want if you don't make the netmask span the 192.168.x.x range, but a side effect is that it will source from the aaa.bbb.ccc.x interface address. This seems to say that 192.168.209.43 is being routed out to the Internet as aaa.bbb.ddd.53 is our external gateway address on the router. This is the routing table on the router: [root@gway01 ~]# route -n Kernel IP routing table Destination Gateway Genmask Flags Metric Ref Use Iface aaa.bbb.ddd.52 0.0.0.0 255.255.255.252 U 0 0 0 eth0 aaa.bbb.ccc.0 0.0.0.0 255.255.255.0 U 0 0 0 eth1 169.254.0.0 0.0.0.0 255.255.0.0 U 1002 0 0 eth0 169.254.0.0 0.0.0.0 255.255.0.0 U 1003 0 0 eth1 0.0.0.0 aaa.bbb.ddd.53 0.0.0.0 UG0 0 0 eth0 I don't see any 192.168.x.x interface/mask there. Where else could it go? Or is that 2nd 169.254.0.0 a typo? -- Les Mikesell lesmikes...@gmail.com ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
[CentOS] Fwd: centos email server suddenly much slower. What to do?
sorry, didn't realize I had not sent it to the list too. I have ran the command again several times, and now it is much slower, ~30/40 msec -- Forwarded message -- From: Marco Fioretti marco.fiore...@gmail.com Date: 2012/9/6 Subject: Re: [CentOS] centos email server suddenly much slower. What to do? To: Steve Clark scl...@netwolves.com 2012/9/6 Steve Clark scl...@netwolves.com: On 09/06/2012 01:58 PM, Marco Fioretti wrote: 2011 msec Pretty slow my dig to the same server ran in 113 msec yes, 2 seconds seemed high to me too. But what does this mean? What can the reason be? Thx Marco ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Fwd: centos email server suddenly much slower. What to do?
Greetings, On Fri, Sep 7, 2012 at 12:16 AM, Marco Fioretti marco.fiore...@gmail.com wrote: sorry, didn't realize I had not sent it to the list too. I have ran the command again several times, and now it is much slower, ~30/40 msec Innocent, ignorant, curious ramble: I understand it has something to do with MX records... Dunno if it will help.. Will setting DNS to 8.8.8.8 help? or will it require payment to google? Recently in India, there were issues with DNS. -- Regards, Rajagopal ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
[CentOS] C6 VM text install not recognizing LV
Hi, I am trying to install a C6 VM on C6 using the text installer using: # virt-install -n C6_1 -r 3072 --os-variant=rhel6 -l \ ftp://ftp.nluug.nl/site/centos.org/CentOS/6.3/os/x86_64/ --disk \ path=/dev/VG1/vm_c6_1 -w network:default --nographics \ -x console=ttyS0 --autostart /dev/VG1/vm_c6_1 has been successfully created. The installation starts but once I get to the disk partitioning no disk is listed and I cannot continue the installation. Even worse, if I press space on the empty list CPU usage goes up to 100% for the qemu-kvm process. ps shows root 26769 0.0 0.1 305120 22108 pts/2S+ 16:34 0:00 /usr/bin/python -tt /usr/sbin/virt-install -n C6_1 -r 3072 --os-variant=rhel6 -l ftp://ftp.nluug.nl/site/centos.org/CentOS/6.3/os/x86_64/ --disk path=/dev/VG1/vm_c6_1 -w network:default --nographics -x console=ttyS0 --autostart qemu 26801 1.0 3.4 3490408 564540 ? Sl 16:34 0:09 /usr/libexec/qemu-kvm -S -M rhel6.3.0 -enable-kvm -m 3072 -smp 1,sockets=1,cores=1,threads=1 -name C6_1 -uuid b166f5ef-11dc-9e1b-eb9a-56e71365f72a -nographic -nodefconfig -nodefaults -chardev socket,id=charmonitor,path=/var/lib/libvirt/qemu/C6_1.monitor,server,nowait -mon chardev=charmonitor,id=monitor,mode=control -rtc base=utc -no-reboot -no-shutdown -kernel /var/lib/libvirt/boot/virtinst-vmlinuz.GZ53UY -initrd /var/lib/libvirt/boot/virtinst-initrd.img.5OlWhn -append method=ftp://ftp.nluug.nl/site/centos.org/CentOS/6.3/os/x86_64/ console=ttyS0 -device piix3-usb-uhci,id=usb,bus=pci.0,addr=0x1.0x2 -drive file=/dev/VG1/vm_c6_1,if=none,id=drive-virtio-disk0,format=raw,cache=none,aio=native -device virtio-blk-pci,scsi=off,bus=pci.0,addr=0x4,drive=drive-virtio-disk0,id=virtio-disk0,bootindex=1 -netdev tap,fd=21,id=hostnet0,vhost=on,vhostfd=22 -device virtio-net-pci,netdev=hostnet0,id=net0,mac=52:54:00:c0:fb:dd,bus=pci.0,addr=0x3 -chardev pty,id=charserial0 -device isa-serial,chardev=charserial0,id=serial0 -device usb-tablet,id=input0 -device virtio-balloon-pci,id=balloon0,bus=pci.0,addr=0x5 Any ideas why anaconda isn't picking up the LV? Could this be a CentOS specific patch to anaconda or is that unlikely? Thanks for any input, Leonard. -- mount -t life -o ro /dev/dna /genetic/research ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Fwd: centos email server suddenly much slower. What to do?
On 09/06/2012 08:56 PM, Rajagopal Swaminathan wrote: Greetings, On Fri, Sep 7, 2012 at 12:16 AM, Marco Fioretti marco.fiore...@gmail.com wrote: sorry, didn't realize I had not sent it to the list too. I have ran the command again several times, and now it is much slower, ~30/40 msec Innocent, ignorant, curious ramble: I understand it has something to do with MX records... Dunno if it will help.. Will setting DNS to 8.8.8.8 help? or will it require payment to google? Recently in India, there were issues with DNS. No that doesn't require payment. Usually you want you DNS to be close to keep the response time short but with a 2 second response time pretty much any nameserver in the world will be faster. So go ahead and use 8.8.8.8 and see if that works better. Regards, Dennis ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Simple routing question
Per: Les Mikesell lesmikesell at gmail.com Thu Sep 6 14:20:43 EDT 2012 --- On Thu, Sep 6, 2012 at 1:09 PM, James B. Byrne byrnejb at harte-lyne.ca wrote: OK, there is no better match than the default in the route table above, so it goes to the default gateway. I assume that's what you want if you don't make the netmask span the 192.168.x.x range, but a side effect is that it will source from the aaa.bbb.ccc.x interface address. This seems to say that 192.168.209.43 is being routed out to the Internet as aaa.bbb.ddd.53 is our external gateway address on the router. This is the routing table on the router: [root at gway01 ~]# route -n Kernel IP routing table Destination Gateway Genmask Flags Metric Ref Use Iface aaa.bbb.ddd.52 0.0.0.0 255.255.255.252 U 0 0 0 eth0 aaa.bbb.ccc.0 0.0.0.0 255.255.255.0 U 0 0 0 eth1 169.254.0.0 0.0.0.0 255.255.0.0 U 1002 0 0 eth0 169.254.0.0 0.0.0.0 255.255.0.0 U 1003 0 0 eth1 0.0.0.0 aaa.bbb.ddd.53 0.0.0.0 UG0 0 0 eth0 I don't see any 192.168.x.x interface/mask there. Where else could it go? Or is that 2nd 169.254.0.0 a typo? --- You see, this is the question I am trying to fathom. Once upon a time, 2 days ago, the interface on the gateway system included ifcfg-eth1:192 which had the address 192.168.0.1 and the netmask 255.255.255.0. At that point I was not aware of any underlying problems and virtual interfaces on other hosts which had addresses like 192.168.216.ddd could be found and connected to from internal host addresses of the form aaa.bbb.ccc.0 where aaa.bbb.ccc is our publicly routable C class assigned address block. The difficulties started when I began testing a new virtual host which eventually will be moved off-site to our DR facility (which is a lot less impressive in fact than it appears when I write that, but at least we have one). On that machine, for no particular reason, I decided to use a different sub-net for the 192.168 IP on the VM guests eth1 i/f. When I did that the kvm host could connect to those i/f, presumably because its own eth1 was set to an address on the same netblock (192.168.209.43) but no other host could connect to either the host's eth1 or any of the running guests' eth1. This is what prompted the question which has turned into this thread. When I set this network up many ages ago I added 192.168.0.1 to the internal i/f of the gateway router in the apparently unfounded belief that if the router knew that the internal i/d had an address in the 192.168 address space then it would not try to route traffic destined for those addresses through the router. As I say, my knowledge of this is very limited. Although, to be fair, everything has worked as I expected up to now and this situation is simply an experiment of my own devising. So, I am hardly a walking accident waiting to happen. What I wanted to have happen was for all traffic destined for 192.168.anything to stay inside the LAN and attached to the specified address, while any traffic that originated from 192.168.anything destined to anywhere else would route through the gateway; where it is NAT mangled. I just want to understand what is going on in this specific case without delving deeply into the subject of routing, for which I do not have the luxury of time. This not impacting anything of significance so I take it up on a time available basis. On the other hand, I am definitely gaining an education in the process. -- *** E-Mail is NOT a SECURE channel *** James B. Byrnemailto:byrn...@harte-lyne.ca Harte Lyne Limited http://www.harte-lyne.ca 9 Brockley Drive vox: +1 905 561 1241 Hamilton, Ontario fax: +1 905 561 0757 Canada L8E 3C3 ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] C6 VM text install not recognizing LV
On 6 September 2012 20:58, Leonard den Ottolander leon...@den.ottolander.nl wrote: Hi, I am trying to install a C6 VM on C6 using the text installer using: # virt-install -n C6_1 -r 3072 --os-variant=rhel6 -l \ ftp://ftp.nluug.nl/site/centos.org/CentOS/6.3/os/x86_64/ --disk \ path=/dev/VG1/vm_c6_1 -w network:default --nographics \ -x console=ttyS0 --autostart /dev/VG1/vm_c6_1 has been successfully created. The installation starts but once I get to the disk partitioning no disk is listed and I cannot continue the installation. [...] Hi, I have 7 vm's installed on LVM volumes (5xCentos 6.3, 1xubuntu and 1xfreebsd) All works fine. Server Centos 6.3 with KVM. All machines installed from iso images. qemu-kvm.x86_642:0.12.1.2-2.295.el6_3.1 @updates Machines installed using command: virt-install -n test -r 2048 --vcpus=2 --os-variant=rhel6 --accelerate -v -c /home/iso/c63mini.iso --mac=RANDOM --bridge=br0 --vnc --vnclisten=w.x.y.z --disk path=/dev/maszyny/test Regards Arek -- UNIX allows me to work smarter, not harder. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Simple routing question
On Thu, Sep 6, 2012 at 2:04 PM, James B. Byrne byrn...@harte-lyne.ca wrote: What I wanted to have happen was for all traffic destined for 192.168.anything to stay inside the LAN and attached to the specified address, while any traffic that originated from 192.168.anything destined to anywhere else would route through the gateway; where it is NAT mangled. To make that happen on your C host, you need to make the netmask cover the range of the LAN addresses. Otherwise it is going to source off of the other interface and send to the default router. I just want to understand what is going on in this specific case without delving deeply into the subject of routing, for which I do not have the luxury of time. This not impacting anything of significance so I take it up on a time available basis. On the other hand, I am definitely gaining an education in the process. There is nothing 'deep' about routing. Just convert the addresses and netmasks to binary and line the bits up. Where there are 0's in the netmask bit positions, the destination doesn't have to match; where there are ones it does. If there are multiple route matches, the most specific match wins - that will be the one with the most 1's in the netmask. Every hop makes this decision independently. But, it doesn't make sense that ifconfig would show an interface/netmask that doesn't appear in the route table. Normally the system does that automatically. -- Les Mikesell lesmikes...@gmail.com ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Simple routing question
Well, I seem to be getting somewhere, although where exactly is open to question. I did this. I put the virtual interface address 192.168.0.1 back onto eth1 of the gateway host and restarted the network services. The ifcfg file looked like this: BOOTPROTO=none BROADCAST=192.168.255.255 DEVICE=eth1:192 IPADDR=192.168.0.1 IPV6INIT=no MTU= NAME=LAN - Non-routable NETMASK=255.255.0.0 NETWORK=192.168.0.0 ONBOOT=yes ONPARENT=yes After the restart ip addr showed this: 3: eth1: BROADCAST,MULTICAST,UP,LOWER_UP mtu 1500 qdisc pfifo_fast state UP qlen 1000 link/ether 00:25:90:60:11:8d brd ff:ff:ff:ff:ff:ff inet aaa.bbb.ccc.1/24 brd aaa.bbb.ccc.255 scope global eth1 inet 192.168.0.1/24 brd 192.168.255.255 scope global eth1:192 inet6 fe80::225:90ff:fe60:118d/64 scope link valid_lft forever preferred_lft forever Note the cidr suffix on 192.168.0.1 = 24 That is not what I expected. Restarting with the same config did not change the initially observed outcome. SO, I edited ifcfg-eth1:192 and added exactly one line: PREFIX=16 and restarted the network. ip addr now shows this: 3: eth1: BROADCAST,MULTICAST,UP,LOWER_UP mtu 1500 qdisc pfifo_fast state UP qlen 1000 link/ether 00:25:90:60:11:8d brd ff:ff:ff:ff:ff:ff inet aaa.bbb.ccc.1/24 brd aaa.bbb.ccc.255 scope global eth1 inet 192.168.0.1/16 brd 192.168.255.255 scope global eth1:192 inet6 fe80::225:90ff:fe60:118d/64 scope link valid_lft forever preferred_lft forever Note that the cidr suffix is now 16. Now, when I try and ping an address on the 192.168 netblock from host C I see this: # ping 192.168.209.43 PING 192.168.209.43 (192.168.209.43) 56(84) bytes of data. From 216.185.71.1: icmp_seq=2 Redirect Host(New nexthop: 192.168.209.43) From 216.185.71.1: icmp_seq=3 Redirect Host(New nexthop: 192.168.209.43) From 216.185.71.1: icmp_seq=4 Redirect Host(New nexthop: 192.168.209.43) From 216.185.71.1: icmp_seq=5 Redirect Host(New nexthop: 192.168.209.43) From 216.185.71.1: icmp_seq=6 Redirect Host(New nexthop: 192.168.209.43) My question now is how do I get to 192.168.209.43? -- *** E-Mail is NOT a SECURE channel *** James B. Byrnemailto:byrn...@harte-lyne.ca Harte Lyne Limited http://www.harte-lyne.ca 9 Brockley Drive vox: +1 905 561 1241 Hamilton, Ontario fax: +1 905 561 0757 Canada L8E 3C3 ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Fwd: centos email server suddenly much slower. What to do?
On Thu, Sep 6, 2012 at 1:46 PM, Marco Fioretti marco.fiore...@gmail.com wrote: Pretty slow my dig to the same server ran in 113 msec yes, 2 seconds seemed high to me too. But what does this mean? What can the reason be? It could be your VM's problem if every operation is slow. 1 gig isn't much RAM these days and that is the obvious thing to fix. If the DNS server is responding quickly to others (I see about 200msec in the US), then it probably isn't the root cause of your problem. -- Les Mikesell lesmikes...@gmail.com ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Simple routing question
On Thu, Sep 6, 2012 at 3:54 PM, James B. Byrne byrn...@harte-lyne.ca wrote: I did this. I put the virtual interface address 192.168.0.1 back onto eth1 of the gateway host and restarted the network services. The ifcfg file looked like this: BOOTPROTO=none BROADCAST=192.168.255.255 DEVICE=eth1:192 IPADDR=192.168.0.1 IPV6INIT=no MTU= NAME=LAN - Non-routable NETMASK=255.255.0.0 NETWORK=192.168.0.0 ONBOOT=yes ONPARENT=yes After the restart ip addr showed this: 3: eth1: BROADCAST,MULTICAST,UP,LOWER_UP mtu 1500 qdisc pfifo_fast state UP qlen 1000 link/ether 00:25:90:60:11:8d brd ff:ff:ff:ff:ff:ff inet aaa.bbb.ccc.1/24 brd aaa.bbb.ccc.255 scope global eth1 inet 192.168.0.1/24 brd 192.168.255.255 scope global eth1:192 inet6 fe80::225:90ff:fe60:118d/64 scope link valid_lft forever preferred_lft forever Note the cidr suffix on 192.168.0.1 = 24 That is not what I expected. Restarting with the same config did not change the initially observed outcome. SO, I edited ifcfg-eth1:192 and added exactly one line: PREFIX=16 and restarted the network. ip addr now shows this: 3: eth1: BROADCAST,MULTICAST,UP,LOWER_UP mtu 1500 qdisc pfifo_fast state UP qlen 1000 link/ether 00:25:90:60:11:8d brd ff:ff:ff:ff:ff:ff inet aaa.bbb.ccc.1/24 brd aaa.bbb.ccc.255 scope global eth1 inet 192.168.0.1/16 brd 192.168.255.255 scope global eth1:192 inet6 fe80::225:90ff:fe60:118d/64 scope link valid_lft forever preferred_lft forever Note that the cidr suffix is now 16. I thought it would figure that out from the NETMASK, but OK Now, when I try and ping an address on the 192.168 netblock from host C I see this: # ping 192.168.209.43 PING 192.168.209.43 (192.168.209.43) 56(84) bytes of data. From 216.185.71.1: icmp_seq=2 Redirect Host(New nexthop: 192.168.209.43) From 216.185.71.1: icmp_seq=3 Redirect Host(New nexthop: 192.168.209.43) From 216.185.71.1: icmp_seq=4 Redirect Host(New nexthop: 192.168.209.43) From 216.185.71.1: icmp_seq=5 Redirect Host(New nexthop: 192.168.209.43) From 216.185.71.1: icmp_seq=6 Redirect Host(New nexthop: 192.168.209.43) My question now is how do I get to 192.168.209.43? This is your router telling the source box that it can send directly to the destination (which it knows because netmasks really are supposed to be global for the subnet and routers don't like to route back the inbound interface). However, it should also have routed the packet. -- Les Mikesell lesmikes...@gmail.com ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] C6 VM text install not recognizing LV
Hi Arek, On Thu, 2012-09-06 at 21:30 +0200, Arek Czereszewski wrote: virt-install -n test -r 2048 --vcpus=2 --os-variant=rhel6 --accelerate -v -c /home/iso/c63mini.iso --mac=RANDOM --bridge=br0 --vnc --vnclisten=w.x.y.z --disk path=/dev/maszyny/test I'm not using vnc but a serial tty (--nographics -x console=ttyS0). An all black and white install :) . Probably an issue with an unusual code path. The question is whether that unusual code path is in anaconda or an outdated virt-install. Regards, Leonard. -- mount -t life -o ro /dev/dna /genetic/research ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] centos email server suddenly much slower. What to do?
Le 2012-09-06 19:14, Marco Fioretti a écrit : Greetings, I run my own email server for some domains I administer, on a centos vps server with a very small number of users. The only services are smtp, imap/pop, webmail however, there is something that is using much more memory than normal (see the comment below from the hosting sysadmin after he checked user_beancounters). Initially we thought it was apache, but even switching it off didn't change anything. What now? My 2 cents. You probably checked a lot of things. - a filesystem (almost) full ? - did you check the logs ? any errors ? - a user sending/receiving a large e-mail ? what is the maximum size of an e-mail in your MTA settings ? - more mail-services-related processes ? - did you try to stop mail services to see if the server usability is back ? - do you run antispam and/or antivirus on incoming/outgoing e-mails ? - to help with DNS, you can probably enable nscd or setup dnsmasq, so it would reduce DNS queries sent to DNS servers. -- Laurent. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Simple routing question
On 09/06/2012 11:11 PM, Les Mikesell wrote: On Thu, Sep 6, 2012 at 3:54 PM, James B. Byrne byrn...@harte-lyne.ca wrote: I did this. I put the virtual interface address 192.168.0.1 back onto eth1 of the gateway host and restarted the network services. The ifcfg file looked like this: BOOTPROTO=none BROADCAST=192.168.255.255 DEVICE=eth1:192 IPADDR=192.168.0.1 IPV6INIT=no MTU= NAME=LAN - Non-routable NETMASK=255.255.0.0 NETWORK=192.168.0.0 ONBOOT=yes ONPARENT=yes After the restart ip addr showed this: 3: eth1: BROADCAST,MULTICAST,UP,LOWER_UP mtu 1500 qdisc pfifo_fast state UP qlen 1000 link/ether 00:25:90:60:11:8d brd ff:ff:ff:ff:ff:ff inet aaa.bbb.ccc.1/24 brd aaa.bbb.ccc.255 scope global eth1 inet 192.168.0.1/24 brd 192.168.255.255 scope global eth1:192 inet6 fe80::225:90ff:fe60:118d/64 scope link valid_lft forever preferred_lft forever Note the cidr suffix on 192.168.0.1 = 24 That is not what I expected. Restarting with the same config did not change the initially observed outcome. SO, I edited ifcfg-eth1:192 and added exactly one line: PREFIX=16 and restarted the network. ip addr now shows this: 3: eth1: BROADCAST,MULTICAST,UP,LOWER_UP mtu 1500 qdisc pfifo_fast state UP qlen 1000 link/ether 00:25:90:60:11:8d brd ff:ff:ff:ff:ff:ff inet aaa.bbb.ccc.1/24 brd aaa.bbb.ccc.255 scope global eth1 inet 192.168.0.1/16 brd 192.168.255.255 scope global eth1:192 inet6 fe80::225:90ff:fe60:118d/64 scope link valid_lft forever preferred_lft forever Note that the cidr suffix is now 16. I thought it would figure that out from the NETMASK, but OK It does. The question is what does the config file for eth1 look like because when you bring up an alias interface first the config file for the parent interface is read and then those values are overwritten by the values in the alias config file. So it might be the case that there is a PREFIX=24 definition in the eth1 file and none in the eth1:192 file which so in the end PREFIX=24 would be used for the alias interface. Regards, Dennis ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] rpmlib(PayloadIsLzma
As a completely different approach to HylaFax front-ends we use AvantFax on a dedicated Hylafax host and web-server. This gives password protected access to the fax resources, logs all traffic, automatically converts incoming and outgoing fax transmissions to pdf, and archives and indexes the contents of every transmission, in and out. Thank's James, Did AvantFax a commercial or a free solution? --- Michel Donais ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] rpmlib(PayloadIsLzma
Many thank's Frank, James and Leonard for your help. --- Michel Donais ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] 802.3ad + Centos 6 + KVM (bridging)
On 09/05/2012 12:22 AM, aurfalien wrote: Hi all, Does any one have 802.3ad (mode 4) working on there Centos6 KVM setup? Of course we are also bridging here. - aurf ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos Yes, using: BONDING_OPTS=mode=802.3ad xmit_hash_policy=layer3+4 miimon=100 and it works. Barbara ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
