Bug #6887
closed
Carp status widget doesn't work, show wrong IPs status
0%
Description
In a two nodes cluster with 3 carp IPs, carp widget doesn't show correctly which node is master or backup for each ip, while ifconfig command does.
The three CARP IPs configuration is;
Node1;
LAN1 --> 172.16.70.43/24, VIHD; 50, ADV; 1, Skew; 0
WAN1 --> 212.170.xx.xx/24, VIHD; 51, ADV; 1, Skew; 100
WAN2 --> 212.170.xx.yy/24, VIHD; 52, ADV; 1, Skew; 0
Node2;
LAN1 --> 172.16.70.43/24, VIHD; 50, ADV; 1, Skew; 100
WAN1 --> 212.170.xx.xx/24, VIHD; 51, ADV; 1, Skew; 0
WAN2 --> 212.170.xx.yy/24, VIHD; 52, ADV; 1, Skew; 100
The web interface shows in node1 LAN1 as master, and WAN1 and WAN2 as backup, while in node2 shows LAN1 as backup, and WAN1 and WAN2 as master, and if I do an ifconfig the result is diferent;
Node1;
ifconfig | grep -i carp
carp: MASTER vhid 50 advbase 1 advskew 0
carp: BACKUP vhid 51 advbase 1 advskew 100
carp: MASTER vhid 52 advbase 1 advskew 0
Node2;
carp: BACKUP vhid 50 advbase 1 advskew 100
carp: MASTER vhid 51 advbase 1 advskew 0
carp: BACKUP vhid 52 advbase 1 advskew 100
The result shows by ifconfig is the correct one, I have already check it.
NOTE; Pfsync is enable, and has its own interface, attached is a screenshot of the config. Attached there is also a screenshot with the config of one of the three CARP IPs in both nodes.
Files
| node1_pfsync2.png (109 KB) node1_pfsync2.png | Pfsync_config_node1_part2 | ||
| node1_pfsync1.png (150 KB) node1_pfsync1.png | Pfsync_config_node1_part1 | ||
| node2_pfsync2.png (125 KB) node2_pfsync2.png | Pfsync_config_node2_part2 | ||
| node2_pfsync1.png (155 KB) node2_pfsync1.png | Pfsync_config_node2_part1 | ||
| node1_carp.png (56.4 KB) node1_carp.png | CARP_config_wan1_node1 | ||
| node2_carp.png (56.9 KB) node2_carp.png | CARP_config_wan1_node2 |
Updated by Jim Pingle almost 9 years ago
- Status changed from New to Rejected
- Priority changed from High to Very Low
I can't reproduce this. If I create a similar setup, the VIP status is reflected properly on both units.
That said, the manner of configuration you are creating (attempting to run master-master with different VIPs) is unsupported, so we are unlikely to invest any time on issues that exist in that area.