[Bug 482419] Re: 802.3ad interface bonding fails if started too early
After applying the update on my servers, I got massive problems in the stability of my network connections. I was running bond in mode 6, which now seems not to work anymore. auto bond0 iface bond0 inet static hwaddress ether 00:30:88:88:88:88 address 192.168.111.5 netmask 255.255.254.0 network 192.168.111.0 broadcast 192.168.112.255 gateway 192.168.111.1 dns-nameservers 127.0.0.1 dns-search bar.local # Both network interfaces slaves eth0 eth1 # (balance-alb) Adaptive load balancing bond_mode 6 bond_miimon 100 bond_updelay 200 bond_downdelay 200 My kern.log got flushed with the following "Jun 20 12:33:57 foo kernel: [ 1043.270668] bonding: bond0: Error: found a client with no channel in the client's hash table", followed by up/down messages from time to time: [...] Jun 20 12:33:31 foo kernel: [ 1009.900122] bonding: bond0: Error: found a client with no channel in the client's hash table Jun 20 12:33:31 foo kernel: [ 1009.900123] bonding: bond0: Error: found a client with no channel in the client's hash table Jun 20 12:33:31 foo kernel: [ 1009.900125] bonding: bond0: Error: found a client with no channel in the client's hash table Jun 20 12:33:31 foo kernel: [ 1010.774755] e1000e: eth0 NIC Link is Up 1000 Mbps Full Duplex, Flow Control: RX/TX Jun 20 12:33:31 foo kernel: [ 1010.862510] bonding: bond0: link status up for interface eth0, enabling it in 0 ms. Jun 20 12:33:31 foo kernel: [ 1010.862514] bonding: bond0: link status definitely up for interface eth0. Jun 20 12:33:31 foo kernel: [ 1010.862517] bonding: bond0: making interface eth0 the new active one. Jun 20 12:33:31 foo kernel: [ 1010.863951] bonding: bond0: first active interface up! Jun 20 12:33:31 foo kernel: [ 1010.95] bonding: bond0: Error: found a client with no channel in the client's hash table Jun 20 12:33:31 foo kernel: [ 1010.97] bonding: bond0: Error: found a client with no channel in the client's hash table Jun 20 12:33:31 foo kernel: [ 1010.98] bonding: bond0: Error: found a client with no channel in the client's hash table Jun 20 12:33:31 foo kernel: [ 1010.900010] bonding: bond0: Error: found a client with no channel in the client's hash table [...] Jun 20 12:34:53 foo kernel: [ 1050.282624] bonding: bond0: Error: found a client with no channel in the client's hash table Jun 20 12:34:53 foo kernel: [ 1050.673490] e1000e: eth0 NIC Link is Up 1000 Mbps Full Duplex, Flow Control: RX/TX Jun 20 12:34:53 foo kernel: [ 1050.733759] bonding: bond0: link status up for interface eth0, enabling it in 0 ms. Jun 20 12:34:53 foo kernel: [ 1050.733762] bonding: bond0: link status definitely up for interface eth0. Jun 20 12:34:53 foo kernel: [ 1050.733765] bonding: bond0: making interface eth0 the new active one. Jun 20 12:34:53 foo kernel: [ 1050.735167] bonding: bond0: first active interface up! Jun 20 12:34:53 foo kernel: [ 1063.804210] e1000e: eth0 NIC Link is Down Jun 20 12:34:53 foo kernel: [ 1063.833760] bonding: bond0: link status down for interface eth0, disabling it in 200 ms. Jun 20 12:34:53 foo kernel: [ 1064.033767] bonding: bond0: link status definitely down for interface eth0, disabling it Jun 20 12:34:53 foo kernel: [ 1064.034501] bonding: bond0: now running without any active interface ! Jun 20 12:34:53 foo kernel: [ 1064.362507] bonding: bond0: Error: found a client with no channel in the client's hash table Jun 20 12:34:53 foo kernel: [ 1064.362510] bonding: bond0: Error: found a client with no channel in the client's hash table Jun 20 12:34:53 foo kernel: [ 1064.362512] bonding: bond0: Error: found a client with no channel in the client's hash table Jun 20 12:34:53 foo kernel: [ 1064.362514] bonding: bond0: Error: found a client with no channel in the client's hash table [...] Jun 20 12:33:31 foo kernel: [ 1010.900118] bonding: bond0: Error: found a client with no channel in the client's hash table Jun 20 12:33:31 foo kernel: [ 1010.900120] bonding: bond0: Error: found a client with no channel in the client's hash table Jun 20 12:33:31 foo kernel: [ 1017.24] e1000e: eth1 NIC Link is Up 1000 Mbps Full Duplex, Flow Control: RX/TX Jun 20 12:33:31 foo kernel: [ 1017.272973] bonding: bond0: link status up for interface eth1, enabling it in 200 ms. Jun 20 12:33:31 foo kernel: [ 1017.460008] bonding: bond0: link status definitely up for interface eth1. Jun 20 12:33:56 foo kernel: [ 1042.481383] e1000e: eth1 NIC Link is Down Jun 20 12:33:56 foo kernel: [ 1042.540011] bonding: bond0: link status down for interface eth1, disabling it in 200 ms. Jun 20 12:33:56 foo kernel: [ 1042.740015] bonding: bond0: link status definitely down for interface eth1, disabling it Jun 20 12:33:56 foo kernel: [ 1042.740021] device eth0 entered promiscuous mode Jun 20 12:33:56 foo kernel: [ 1042.740435] e1000e: eth0 NIC Link is Down Jun 20 12:33:56 foo kernel: [ 1042.840015] bonding: bond0: link status down for interface eth0, disabling it in 200
[Bug 673427] Re: DHCP with LDAP config should load class definitions first
As you can see in the LDIF, the classes are declared before the pools. If you don't do that, DHCPD will throw an error. To take care of the correct order is "easy" if you load the stuff manually with LDIF files in the LDAP. But we use GoSA (www.gosa- project.org) here, which provides a graphical webgui to administer ther DHCP via LDAP. So we cannot take care of the right order. To load classes before other declarations if the config is saved in LDAP should be provided natively by DHCP. That's my wish... -- DHCP with LDAP config should load class definitions first https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/673427 You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 673427] Re: DHCP with LDAP config should load class definitions first
LDIF with DHCP configuration ** Attachment added: "dhcp.ldif" https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/dhcp3/+bug/673427/+attachment/1730378/+files/dhcp.ldif -- DHCP with LDAP config should load class definitions first https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/673427 You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 673427] Re: DHCP with LDAP config should load class definitions first
dhcpd.conf for LDAP saved configuration ** Attachment added: "dhcpd.conf_with_LDAP" https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/dhcp3/+bug/673427/+attachment/1730377/+files/dhcpd.conf_with_LDAP -- DHCP with LDAP config should load class definitions first https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/673427 You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 673427] Re: DHCP with LDAP config should load class definitions first
Traditional dhcpd.conf ** Attachment added: "dhcp.conf_traditional" https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/dhcp3/+bug/673427/+attachment/1730376/+files/dhcp.conf_traditional -- DHCP with LDAP config should load class definitions first https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/673427 You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 673427] Re: DHCP with LDAP config should load class definitions first
Uuups, of course it's
class "Other_Clients" {
match if not (substring (hardware,1,3)=00:04:13);
}
** Description changed:
Binary package hint: dhcp3-server-ldap
Take as example the following dhcpd.conf (just as example, it's syntax
is not right):
global parameters...
class "VoIP_Phones" {
-match if (substring (hardware,1,3)=00:04:13);
+ match if (substring (hardware,1,3)=00:04:13);
}
class "Other_Clients" {
-match if (substring (hardware,1,3)=00:04:13);
+ match if not (substring (hardware,1,3)=00:04:13);
}
subnet 204.254.239.0 netmask 255.255.255.224 {
-subnet-specific parameters...
+ subnet-specific parameters...
-pool "VoIP" {
- allow members of "VoIP_Phones";
- deny members of "Other_Clients";
+ pool "VoIP" {
+ allow members of "VoIP_Phones";
+ deny members of "Other_Clients";
- pool-specific parameters...
-}
+ pool-specific parameters...
+ }
-pool "VoIP" {
- deny members of "VoIP_Phones";
- allow members of "Other_Clients";
+ pool "VoIP" {
+ deny members of "VoIP_Phones";
+ allow members of "Other_Clients";
- pool-specific parameters...
-}
+ pool-specific parameters...
+ }
}
If you want to have such kind of configuration LDAP based, you would
create corresponding LDIF files and load them in the LDAP.
But - and that's tricky - you need to ensure to load all classes that
get referenced by the pool declarations later get loaded into the LDAP
before the pool declarations.
In other words - DHCP does not automatically load class declarations
first. If you you first save the pools into LDAP, followed by the
classes, DHCP will throw an error on restart because it finds the
reference to the class before the class declaration itself.
--
DHCP with LDAP config should load class definitions first
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/673427
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
--
ubuntu-bugs mailing list
ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 673427] [NEW] DHCP with LDAP config should load class definitions first
Public bug reported:
Binary package hint: dhcp3-server-ldap
Take as example the following dhcpd.conf (just as example, it's syntax
is not right):
global parameters...
class "VoIP_Phones" {
match if (substring (hardware,1,3)=00:04:13);
}
class "Other_Clients" {
match if not (substring (hardware,1,3)=00:04:13);
}
subnet 204.254.239.0 netmask 255.255.255.224 {
subnet-specific parameters...
pool "VoIP" {
allow members of "VoIP_Phones";
deny members of "Other_Clients";
pool-specific parameters...
}
pool "VoIP" {
deny members of "VoIP_Phones";
allow members of "Other_Clients";
pool-specific parameters...
}
}
If you want to have such kind of configuration LDAP based, you would
create corresponding LDIF files and load them in the LDAP.
But - and that's tricky - you need to ensure to load all classes that
get referenced by the pool declarations later get loaded into the LDAP
before the pool declarations.
In other words - DHCP does not automatically load class declarations
first. If you you first save the pools into LDAP, followed by the
classes, DHCP will throw an error on restart because it finds the
reference to the class before the class declaration itself.
** Affects: dhcp3 (Ubuntu)
Importance: Undecided
Status: New
--
DHCP with LDAP config should load class definitions first
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/673427
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
--
ubuntu-bugs mailing list
ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
