<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN"> <HTML><HEAD><TITLE>[Linux-cluster] Multiple communication channels</TITLE> <META http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html; charset=us-ascii"> <META content="MSHTML 6.00.2900.6049" name=GENERATOR></HEAD> <BODY> <DIV dir=ltr align=left><SPAN class=921164319-29122010><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff size=2>Hello,</FONT></SPAN></DIV> <DIV dir=ltr align=left><SPAN class=921164319-29122010><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff size=2></FONT></SPAN> </DIV> <DIV dir=ltr align=left><SPAN class=921164319-29122010><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff size=2>AFAIK, Multi-interface heartbeat is something that was only recently added to RHCS (earlier this year, if I recall correctly).</FONT></SPAN></DIV> <DIV dir=ltr align=left><SPAN class=921164319-29122010><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff size=2></FONT></SPAN> </DIV> <DIV dir=ltr align=left><SPAN class=921164319-29122010><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff size=2>Until then, the failover part was usually achieved by using a bonded interface as heartbeat interface.</FONT></SPAN></DIV> <DIV dir=ltr align=left><SPAN class=921164319-29122010><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff size=2>If possible, I would suggest using 2 (connected) Multicast switches and running a bond from each server to each switch.</FONT></SPAN></DIV> <DIV dir=ltr align=left><SPAN class=921164319-29122010><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff size=2>Or 2 regular switches and broadcast heartbeat (switches only connected to eachother)</FONT></SPAN></DIV> <DIV dir=ltr align=left><SPAN class=921164319-29122010><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff size=2>Otherwise, using an active-active bond (channel?) with 2 crossover cables might also work, but offers less protection against interface failures.</FONT></SPAN></DIV> <DIV dir=ltr align=left><SPAN class=921164319-29122010><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff size=2></FONT></SPAN> </DIV> <DIV dir=ltr align=left><SPAN class=921164319-29122010><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff size=2></FONT></SPAN> </DIV> <DIV dir=ltr align=left><SPAN class=921164319-29122010><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff size=2>Regards,</FONT></SPAN></DIV> <DIV dir=ltr align=left><SPAN class=921164319-29122010><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff size=2></FONT></SPAN> </DIV> <DIV dir=ltr align=left><SPAN class=921164319-29122010><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff size=2>Kit</FONT></SPAN></DIV><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff size=2></FONT><BR> <DIV class=OutlookMessageHeader lang=en-us dir=ltr align=left> <HR tabIndex=-1> <FONT face=Tahoma size=2><B>From:</B> linux-cluster-bounces@redhat.com [mailto:linux-cluster-bounces@redhat.com] <B>On Behalf Of </B>Stefan Lesicnik<BR><B>Sent:</B> woensdag 29 december 2010 20:03<BR><B>To:</B> linux-cluster@redhat.com<BR><B>Subject:</B> [Linux-cluster] Multiple communication channels<BR></FONT><BR></DIV> <DIV></DIV> <P><FONT size=2>Hi all,<BR><BR>I am running RHCS 5 and have a two node cluster with a shared qdisk. I have a bonded network bond0 and a back to back crossover eth1.<BR><BR>Currently I have multicast cluster communication over the crossover, but was wondering if it was possible to use bond0 as an alternative / failover. So if eth1 was down, it could still communicate?<BR><BR>I havent been able to find anything in the FAQ / documentation that would suggest this, so I thought I would ask.<BR><BR>Thanks alot and I hope everyone has a great new year :)<BR><BR>Stefan<BR><BR>--<BR>Linux-cluster mailing list<BR>Linux-cluster@redhat.com<BR><A href="https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/linux-cluster">https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/linux-cluster</A></FONT> </P> <HR noShade SIZE=1> <P class=avgcert align=left color="#000000">No virus found in this message.<BR>Checked by AVG - <A href="http://www.avg.com">www.avg.com</A><BR>Version: 10.0.1191 / Virus Database: 1435/3346 - Release Date: 12/29/10</P></BODY></HTML>