There's really nothing special about 231.7.7.7:9876. It's just a normal multicast address & port. Cluster broadcast and discovery should work fine with any other multicast address & port assuming the environment allows the communication. Have you verified that the UDP packets are actually making it from one node to another with something other than 231.7.7.7:9876?
Can you paste the broadcast and discovery group configuration from a configuration which is not using 231.7.7.7:9876? Have you tried using 231.7.7.7 but with a different port (e.g. 9877)? If so, what was the result? Justin On Tue, Apr 21, 2020 at 9:46 PM Aaron Dutenhoefer <aar...@gmail.com> wrote: > I'm using Artemis ActiveMQ v2.11.0 currently - have been using it since 1.x > days. I have three environments: Integration, QA, and Production. In > integration, I've got a standalone broker instance. In QA I'm running a > two-node symmetric cluster using UDP discovery. I followed the docs and > that worked fine. In Production I'm trying to set up a four-node symmetric > cluster. > > When I set up my first production cluster node, I started it up and it > immediately joined my QA cluster. This was expected since the config still > was using 231.7.7.7:9876 as the discovery address/port. (My Int/Qa/Prod > VMs are in the same datacenter/VLAN so UDP traffic routes across them) I > then reconfigured the settings using another UDP address - Only to find the > other nodes configured using the new multicast/UDP address:port never > connect or discover each other. > > I've double-and-triple-checked my configs and even tried using the examples > and updating my working QA cluster to use another multicast addr (like > 231.7.7.8 for instance). Any other address causes the cluster to lose > sight of all other nodes. It really seems like you can't create a > symmetric artemis cluster that works except by using the 231.7.7.7:9876 > config. > > Has anyone else encountered this issue or ever tried to set up a simple > two-node test cluster using another discovery address/port besides > 231.7.7.7 and gotten it to work? Appreciate any suggestions anyone can > offer. > > Thanks, > > -a >
