[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       linux-ha-dev
Subject:    Re: [Linux-ha-dev] [Patch] Patch for IPsrcaddr.(2/2)
From:       renayama19661014 () ybb ! ne ! jp
Date:       2012-01-28 23:04:31
Message-ID: 692501.84624.qm () web200017 ! mail ! kks ! yahoo ! co ! jp
[Download RAW message or body]

Hi Dejan,

Thank you for comments.

> OK. Applied that too. The ocft test passes, but cannot work
> without specifying the existing address. I'm not sure, but I
> think that ocft cannot ask for user input, so the test is going
> to be semi-automatic.

All right!
I confirmed the next contents.
 * https://github.com/ClusterLabs/resource-agents/commit/9cd054d15112bd7053763c7655059a07e07f4e69
                
 * https://github.com/ClusterLabs/resource-agents/commit/7bfd0597a1d2efcd4cd2f579675510cff725ec17


Many thanks!!
Hideo Yamauchi.

--- On Sat, 2012/1/28, Dejan Muhamedagic <dejan@suse.de> wrote:

> Hi Hideo-san,
> 
> On Wed, Jan 25, 2012 at 10:09:26AM +0900, renayama19661014@ybb.ne.jp wrote:
> > Hi Dejan,
> > 
> > Thank you for comments.
> > 
> > > > > > > Now the ocft test fails:
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > 2012/01/23_21:39:40 ERROR: IP address [127.0.0.3] is a loopback
> > > > > > > address, thus can not be preferred source address
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > Any idea how to update the ocft test case?
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > I try this problem, too.
> > > > > 
> > > > > I carried out ocf-tester with three cases.
> > > > > 
> > > > > Case1) I carry it out after improving an address by ifconfig command.
> > > > > 
> > > > > [root@rh57-3 ClusterLabs-resource-agents-7edbe1d]# ifconfig eth0:1 \
> > > > > 192.168.40.7 up [root@rh57-3 ClusterLabs-resource-agents-7edbe1d]# \
> > > > > ocf-tester -v -n IPsrcaddr -o ipaddress=192.168.40.7 \
> > > > > /usr/lib/ocf/resource.d/heartbeat/IPsrcaddr Beginning tests for \
> > > > > /usr/lib/ocf/resource.d/heartbeat/IPsrcaddr... Testing permissions with uid \
> > > > >                 nobody
> > > > > Testing: meta-data
> > > > [...] [Note to myself: drop the meta-data output]
> > > > > ERROR: Setup problem: couldn't find command: gawk
> > > > 
> > > > Install gawk perhaps?
> > 
> > I am mysterious...gwak had been already installed, but this error seemed to be \
> > given.
> 
> Sorry, it was my mistake. ocf-tester does this on purpose.
> 
> > The next environment variable(OCF_TESTER_FAIL_HAVE_BINARY) of ocf-tester seems to \
> > influence it somehow or other. 
> > (snip)
> > OCF_TESTER_FAIL_HAVE_BINARY=1
> > export OCF_TESTER_FAIL_HAVE_BINARY
> > OCF_RESKEY_CRM_meta_interval=0
> > test_command monitor
> > (snip)
> > 
> > Similar error occurs in IPaddr2.
> > 
> > [root@rh57-3 heartbeat]# ocf-tester -v -n IPaddr2 -o ip=192.168.40.8 \
> > /usr/lib/ocf/resource.d/heartbeat/IPaddr2 Beginning tests for \
> > /usr/lib/ocf/resource.d/heartbeat/IPaddr2... Testing permissions with uid nobody
> > (snip)
> > Checking current state
> > Testing: monitor
> > Testing: monitor
> > ERROR: Setup problem: couldn't find command: ip
> > Testing: start
> > (snip)
> > 
> > Is not a correction of ocf-tester necessary?
> > 
> > > > 
> > > > [...]
> > > > > INFO: The ip route has been already set.(192.168.40.0/24, eth0, default via \
> > > > > 192.168.40.1 dev eth0 )
> > > > 
> > > > Hmm, I saw different stuff:
> > > > 
> > > > ERROR: command 'ip route replace 10.2.13.0/24 169.254.0.0/16 dev eth0 src \
> > > > 10.2.13.154' failed 
> > > > Debugging:
> > > > 
> > > > + ip route replace 10.2.13.0/24 169.254.0.0/16 dev eth0 src 10.2.13.154
> > > > Error: either "to" is duplicate, or "169.254.0.0/16" is a garbage.
> > > > 
> > > > The route list:
> > > > 
> > > > xen-d:~ # ip route list
> > > > default via 10.2.13.1 dev eth0 
> > > > 10.2.13.0/24 dev eth0  proto kernel  scope link  src 10.2.13.54 
> > > > 127.0.0.0/8 dev lo  scope link 
> > > > 169.254.0.0/16 dev eth0  scope link 
> > > > 
> > > > It seems like the last entry confuses the new calculation code.
> > 
> > In my environment, I set it in NOZEROCONF=yes.
> > Therefore, the last entry does not exist.
> 
> Right. But it's still better that the RA can handle this
> situation too.
> 
> > > It turns out that the problem is here (nothing to do with your
> > > patch):
> > > 
> > > NETWORK=`ip route list dev $INTERFACE scope link|grep -o '^[^ ]*'`
> > > 
> > > Perhaps we should do:
> > > 
> > > NETWORK=`ip route list dev $INTERFACE match $ipaddress scope link|grep -o '^[^ \
> > > ]*'` 
> > > Opinions?
> > 
> > I think that the method that you showed is more right.
> 
> OK. Applied that too. The ocft test passes, but cannot work
> without specifying the existing address. I'm not sure, but I
> think that ocft cannot ask for user input, so the test is going
> to be semi-automatic.
> 
> Cheers,
> 
> Dejan
> 
> > Best Regards,
> > Hideo Yamauchi.
> > 
> > _______________________________________________________
> > Linux-HA-Dev: Linux-HA-Dev@lists.linux-ha.org
> > http://lists.linux-ha.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-ha-dev
> > Home Page: http://linux-ha.org/
> 
_______________________________________________________
Linux-HA-Dev: Linux-HA-Dev@lists.linux-ha.org
http://lists.linux-ha.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-ha-dev
Home Page: http://linux-ha.org/


[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

Configure | About | News | Add a list | Sponsored by KoreLogic