Dear all,
Has anyone experienced this whilst running DRBD over eth1 between two
CentOS 5.7 servers?
eth1 is a private IP address, unroutable. eth0 is the public address.
CentOS will reply sometimes once every 3 days or every 14mins~ saying
"My public IP is on eth1" to arp requests when it's not,
--
Mike Burger
http://www.bubbanfriends.org
"It's always suicide-mission this, save-the-planet that. No one ever just
stops by to say 'hi' anymore." --Colonel Jack O'Neill, SG1
> Dear all,
>
> Has anyone experienced this whilst running DRBD over eth1 between two
> CentOS 5.7 servers?
>
> eth1
On 12/26/2012 02:06 AM, Gavin Henry wrote:
> # For the dual interface - 06.12.12
> net.ipv4.conf.eth0.arp_filter = 1
> net.ipv4.conf.eth0.arp_ignore = 1
> net.ipv4.conf.eth1.arp_filter = 1
> net.ipv4.conf.eth1.arp_ignore = 1
> net.ipv4.conf.all.arp_filter = 1
First things first... Can you confirm
On 12/26/2012 04:33 AM, Mike Burger wrote:
> 169.xxx.xxx.xxx is most certainly a "routable" IP block, as far as
> internet standards go.
Most of 169/8 is, but presumably he meant 169.254.0.0/16.
> The only "non-routable" (i.e. reserved for private networks) IP blocks are:
The list is slightly lo
> On 12/26/2012 04:33 AM, Mike Burger wrote:
>> 169.xxx.xxx.xxx is most certainly a "routable" IP block, as far as
>> internet standards go.
>
> Most of 169/8 is, but presumably he meant 169.254.0.0/16.
>
>> The only "non-routable" (i.e. reserved for private networks) IP blocks
>> are:
>
> The lis
On Wed, Dec 26, 2012 at 12:25 PM, Mike Burger wrote:
>
> > On 12/26/2012 04:33 AM, Mike Burger wrote:
> >> 169.xxx.xxx.xxx is most certainly a "routable" IP block, as far as
> >> internet standards go.
> >
> > Most of 169/8 is, but presumably he meant 169.254.0.0/16.
> >
> >> The only "non-routabl
>> We're having to shut eth1 down and bring it up for sync at night.
>
> To what type of equipment are your ethernet devices connected?
I'm asking now.
> Are they
> both connected to the same device?
Same VLAN, not sure about same device yet. Checking.
> I've seen some devices (particularly
> 2
> Most of 169/8 is, but presumably he meant 169.254.0.0/16.
>
>> The only "non-routable" (i.e. reserved for private networks) IP blocks are:
>
> The list is slightly longer than that:
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reserved_IP_addresses#Reserved_IPv4_addresses
No, Mike was right. 169.x.x.x which i
First things first... Can you confirm that those are still the values in
> place?
>
> cat /proc/sys/net/ipv4/conf/eth0/arp_filter
> cat /proc/sys/net/ipv4/conf/eth0/arp_ignore
> cat /proc/sys/net/ipv4/conf/eth1/arp_filter
> cat /proc/sys/net/ipv4/conf/eth1/arp_ignore
> cat /proc/sys/net/ipv4/conf/
Couldn't get this to work so had to disable it.
On 26 December 2012 19:47, Gavin Henry wrote:
> First things first... Can you confirm that those are still the values in
>> place?
>>
>> cat /proc/sys/net/ipv4/conf/eth0/arp_filter
>> cat /proc/sys/net/ipv4/conf/eth0/arp_ignore
>> cat /proc/sys/net
10 matches
Mail list logo