Carlos A. Carnero Delgado
2019-Sep-20 03:55 UTC
[CentOS] 7.7.1908, interface bonding, and default route
Hi! I just upgraded a machine to 7.7.1908 and the default route is not being set on boot. This particular server has a bonded interface, and the corresponding configuration for the master is ( /etc/sysconfig/network-scripts/ifcfg-bond0): TYPE=Bond BOOTPROTO=none DEFROUTE=yes IPV4_FAILURE_FATAL=yes NAME=bond0 DEVICE=bond0 ONBOOT=yes IPADDR=10.3.20.131 PREFIX=24 GATEWAY=10.3.20.1 DNS1=10.3.2.8 BONDING_MASTER=yes BONDING_OPTS="mode=802.3ad xmit_hash_policy=layer2 miimon=100" The slaves (two of them) are configured like TYPE=Ethernet BOOTPROTO=none NAME=bond0-slave0 DEVICE=em3 ONBOOT=yes MASTER=bond0 SLAVE=yes After booting, the routing table is 10.3.20.0/24 dev bond0 proto kernel scope link src 10.3.20.131 metric 300 with no default route configured (manually adding it will work, of course.) This machine worked perfectly before, and it did during previous upgrades and reboots. Has anyone ever had this problem before? Thanks, Carlos.
Giles Coochey
2019-Sep-20 10:16 UTC
[CentOS] 7.7.1908, interface bonding, and default route
On 20/09/2019 04:55, Carlos A. Carnero Delgado wrote:> Hi! > > I just upgraded a machine to 7.7.1908 and the default route is not being > set on boot. This particular server has a bonded interface, and the > corresponding configuration for the master is ( > /etc/sysconfig/network-scripts/ifcfg-bond0): > > TYPE=Bond > BOOTPROTO=none > DEFROUTE=yes > IPV4_FAILURE_FATAL=yes > NAME=bond0 > DEVICE=bond0 > ONBOOT=yes > IPADDR=10.3.20.131 > PREFIX=24 > GATEWAY=10.3.20.1 > DNS1=10.3.2.8 > BONDING_MASTER=yes > BONDING_OPTS="mode=802.3ad xmit_hash_policy=layer2 miimon=100" > > The slaves (two of them) are configured like > > TYPE=Ethernet > BOOTPROTO=none > NAME=bond0-slave0 > DEVICE=em3 > ONBOOT=yes > MASTER=bond0 > SLAVE=yes > > After booting, the routing table is > > 10.3.20.0/24 dev bond0 proto kernel scope link src 10.3.20.131 metric 300 > > with no default route configured (manually adding it will work, of course.) > > This machine worked perfectly before, and it did during previous upgrades > and reboots. Has anyone ever had this problem before? >I have a similar set up to you, and just did the upgrade to 1908, I didn't experience the problem you had, I can't see anything out of the ordinary in your network files. I originally set up my bond using nmtui Here is my configuration: #Bond: BONDING_OPTS="ad_select=stable all_slaves_active=0 arp_all_targets=any downdelay=0 fail_over_mac=none lp_interval=1 miimon=100 min_links=0 mode=802.3ad num_grat_arp=1 num_unsol_na=1 primary_reselect=always resend_igmp=1 updelay=0 use_carrier=1 xmit_hash_policy=layer2" TYPE=Bond BONDING_MASTER=yes PROXY_METHOD=none BROWSER_ONLY=no BOOTPROTO=none IPADDR=a.b.c.249 PREFIX=24 GATEWAY=a.b.c.1 DNS1=a.b.d.253 DNS2=a.b.d.4 DNS3=a.b.d.12 DOMAIN=redacted.net DEFROUTE=yes IPV4_FAILURE_FATAL=no IPV6INIT=yes NAME="Bond connection 1" UUID=4ccacb42-dfad-484f-8168-b78c70a66c8d DEVICE=nm-bond ONBOOT=yes IPV6_AUTOCONF=yes IPV6_DEFROUTE=yes IPV6_FAILURE_FATAL=no IPV6_ADDR_GEN_MODE=stable-privacy #Channel Interface example TYPE=Ethernet NAME="Ethernet connection 1" UUID=5a961074-d502-49a3-ae3b-b6850a990e86 DEVICE=enp7s0f0 ONBOOT=yes MASTER=nm-bond SLAVE=yes MASTER_UUID=4ccacb42-dfad-484f-8168-b78c70a66c8d> Thanks, > Carlos. > _______________________________________________ > CentOS mailing list > CentOS at centos.org > https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-- Giles Coochey
Carlos A. Carnero Delgado
2019-Sep-20 13:31 UTC
[CentOS] 7.7.1908, interface bonding, and default route
El vie., 20 de sep. de 2019 a la(s) 06:16, Giles Coochey (giles at coochey.net) escribi?:> I have a similar set up to you, and just did the upgrade to 1908, I > didn't experience the problem you had, I can't see anything out of the > ordinary in your network files. >I have reviewed the configuration several times now, and still can't see if there's anything wrong with it. What I found is that, after the system has booted up, if I systemctl restart network the default route does gets applied. Thanks a lot for your input!