Hi,
I''m having a hard time getting bonding to work on FC5t3. It looks like
the bond0 interface bond0 is renamed to pbond0 by xen [*] and the
enslaving does not work anymore then. It works if I log on the
terminal and ifenslave the devices to pbond0 instead of bond0 after
the boot process has finished.
But I want this to be handled automatically during reboots, so I tried
assigning the bonding slaves to pbond0 as a master in the
ifcfg-eth{0,1} scripts, but that doesn''t work.
What is causing the bond0 rename and should this renaming be
considered by initscript? Is this a user error or should I file this
against bugzilla? xen or initscripts?
Thanks!
[*] The only reference I found was a Japanese site and google''s
translation of it.
http://translate.google.com/translate?hl=en&sl=ja&u=http://hoop.euqset.org/archives/001619.html
--
Axel.Thimm at ATrpms.net
Axel Thimm (Axel.Thimm@ATrpms.net) said:> I''m having a hard time getting bonding to work on FC5t3.Not surprising. The way Xen does its bridging breaks bonding fairly badly. It''s possible it could be fixed in the xen scripts, but I don''t think it''s been looked at. Bill
On Fri, Feb 24, 2006 at 06:28:20PM -0500, Bill Nottingham wrote:> Axel Thimm (Axel.Thimm@ATrpms.net) said: > > I''m having a hard time getting bonding to work on FC5t3. > > Not surprising. The way Xen does its bridging breaks bonding > fairly badly. > > It''s possible it could be fixed in the xen scripts, but I don''t > think it''s been looked at.are the xen scripts called by initscripts? E.g. will this logic be encapsulated in such a way that an ifdown/ifup on bond0 outside the boot sequence would do the right thing w/o initscripts knowing anything more about xen, or would initscripts still require some special xen handling? I haven''t looked to deeply into xen, so I may be missing the obvious here. -- Axel.Thimm at ATrpms.net
Axel Thimm (Axel.Thimm@ATrpms.net) said:> are the xen scripts called by initscripts?No, they are their own entirely separate pile of goo. Bill
On Fri, Feb 24, 2006 at 06:28:20PM -0500, Bill Nottingham wrote:> Axel Thimm (Axel.Thimm@ATrpms.net) said: > > I''m having a hard time getting bonding to work on FC5t3. > > Not surprising. The way Xen does its bridging breaks bonding > fairly badly. > > It''s possible it could be fixed in the xen scripts, but I don''t > think it''s been looked at.I now jumped into the xen networking concepts. These make sense, but there are two issues: a) bonding should be performed onto the "physical" bonding interface, which xen renames to pbond0. Still the initscripts only work with MASTER=pbond0 if called *after* completion of the boot process. b) even if a) is fixed and requires MASTER=pbond0 setting, the switching from a xen kernel to a non-xen kernel the configuration in the initscripts would be bogus (pointing to a nonexisting pbond0), and the bonding device would be w/o slaves. I don''t understand why a) happens, seems to be dependent on the order of the steps performed. Maybe the bonding/enslaving (at boot time) happens before xen renames the bond0 device and later on the enslaving is wrong. Reruning the ifup scripts sees the renamed devices and performs properly. That''s a theory at least. I''m not sure how to solve b). Ideally one would like to not have xen specific actions in initscripts, but otherwise one risks cutting of the system of the net completely when upgrading kernels and booting into the wron one. Probably not something one wants when setting up bonding to ensure network availability. ;) Should I file a bugzilla? xen or initscripts? -- Axel.Thimm at ATrpms.net
Axel Thimm (Axel.Thimm@ATrpms.net) said:> I don''t understand why a) happens, seems to be dependent on the order > of the steps performed. Maybe the bonding/enslaving (at boot time) > happens before xen renames the bond0 device and later on the enslaving > is wrong.Correct.> I''m not sure how to solve b). Ideally one would like to not have xen > specific actions in initscripts, but otherwise one risks cutting of > the system of the net completely when upgrading kernels and booting > into the wron one. Probably not something one wants when setting up > bonding to ensure network availability. ;) > > Should I file a bugzilla? xen or initscripts?Ideally, xen shouldn''t be mucking with networking that much. It does it because of some supposed race. Bill> -- > fedora-test-list mailing list > fedora-test-list@redhat.com > To unsubscribe: > https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-test-list
Hi, I''m retrying to get bonding and xen working with FC5: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=189473 The summary is that o xend at boot time does not attach anything to xenbr, the network is other than the added broken xenbr unaltered. So at least booting into kernel-xen0 doesn''t hook you off the wire anymore (as it was with FC5t3) o after calling xend restart the bridge is almost properly set up, only the slaves of the bond interface get lost in the process Anyone know how to fix/workaround these issues? Thanks! -- Axel.Thimm at ATrpms.net
Mike.Kent@indystar.com
2006-Apr-20 14:14 UTC
Re: [Fedora-xen] Re: initscripts, xen and bonding
I''m using Fedora 4 and wound up fixing it manually for now, if we decide to keep xen we''ll write a boot script to do it. Basically, both bond0 and pbond0 must be active at the same time, so leave your bond0 setup as is. Copy /etc/sysconfig/network-scripts/ifcfg-bond0 to ifcfg-pbond0 and rename the Device value (not sure this step is necessary). Reboot and on bootup, do: sudo ifconfig pbond0 (IP address) network (255.255.255.x) broadcast (your address) sudo ifenslave pbond0 eth0 sudo ifenslave pbond0 eth1 The 3 addresses above are the same as used by bond0. Axel Thimm <Axel.Thimm@ATrpms.net> Sent by: fedora-xen-bounces@redhat.com 04/20/06 08:15 AM Please respond to fedora-xen@redhat.com To fedora-xen@redhat.com cc Subject [Fedora-xen] Re: initscripts, xen and bonding Hi, I''m retrying to get bonding and xen working with FC5: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=189473 The summary is that o xend at boot time does not attach anything to xenbr, the network is other than the added broken xenbr unaltered. So at least booting into kernel-xen0 doesn''t hook you off the wire anymore (as it was with FC5t3) o after calling xend restart the bridge is almost properly set up, only the slaves of the bond interface get lost in the process Anyone know how to fix/workaround these issues? Thanks! -- Axel.Thimm at ATrpms.net -- Fedora-xen mailing list Fedora-xen@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-xen
On Thu, Apr 20, 2006 at 02:15:36PM +0200, Axel Thimm wrote:> Hi, > > I''m retrying to get bonding and xen working with FC5: > > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=189473It''s been almost a year and no response to the bugzilla. There was a related bug on RHEL5, which was supposedly fixed in beta2. The core issue is that renaming the bond device will lose its slaves and they require re-enslaving in the xen scripts otherwise your network stops working at all. Can anyone confirm that bonding/xen really works on RHEL5? If so, can we have the fix also for FC6?> The summary is that > > o xend at boot time does not attach anything to xenbr, the network is > other than the added broken xenbr unaltered. So at least booting > into kernel-xen0 doesn''t hook you off the wire anymore (as it was > with FC5t3) > > o after calling xend restart the bridge is almost properly set up, > only the slaves of the bond interface get lost in the process > > Anyone know how to fix/workaround these issues? > > Thanks!-- Axel.Thimm at ATrpms.net