Hi! Found the answer: Some nodes were disagreeing on the netmasks for 10.2.2.x...
Regards, Ulrich >>> "Ulrich Windl" <[email protected]> schrieb am 13.04.2011 um 16:38 in Nachricht <[email protected]>: > Hi! > > I have a question: corosync reports a faulty redundant ring: > # corosync-cfgtool -s > Printing ring status. > Local node ID 17831084 > RING ID 0 > id = 172.20.16.1 > status = ring 0 active with no faults > RING ID 1 > id = 10.2.2.1 > status = Marking seqid 112097 ringid 1 interface 10.2.2.1 FAULTY - > adminisrtative intervention required. > > (Note the spelling error "adminisrtative" (corosync-1.3.0-5.6.1 of SLES11 > SP1)!) > > The obvious reason of using two adjacent port numbers in both rings does not > apply. > After enabling the rings, they are quickly disabled: > > corosync[7526]: [TOTEM ] Marking seqid 112097 ringid 1 > interface 10.2.2.1 FAULTY - adminisrtative intervention required. > > I wonder: Why is this? Ideas? > > Regards, > Ulrich > > > _______________________________________________ > Linux-HA mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.linux-ha.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-ha > See also: http://linux-ha.org/ReportingProblems > _______________________________________________ Linux-HA mailing list [email protected] http://lists.linux-ha.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-ha See also: http://linux-ha.org/ReportingProblems
