Use of MILTINIC and proxy - Veritas Cluster Server

This is a discussion on Use of MILTINIC and proxy - Veritas Cluster Server ; Hi there, I was wondering if anyone can help me with a little configuration problem. I have a setup with two nodes and four service groups. In normal production there will be two services running on each node. Each node ...

+ Reply to Thread
Results 1 to 5 of 5

Thread: Use of MILTINIC and proxy

  1. Use of MILTINIC and proxy


    Hi there,



    I was wondering if anyone can help me with a little configuration problem. I
    have a setup with two nodes and four service groups. In normal production
    there will be two services running on each node. Each node of my system has
    got two ge interfaces. My plan was to make a MILTINIC type in one of my
    service groups, and then point to the MULTINIC via a proxy from the other
    group. But what will happen when you do a fail-over of the group with the
    MULTINIC????? How do you make the best and most flexible solution on this
    setup?



    Hope somebody has got some input J



    Kindest regards



    RaZ



  2. Re: Use of MILTINIC and proxy

    RaZ wrote:
    >
    > Hi there,
    >
    > I was wondering if anyone can help me with a little configuration problem. I
    > have a setup with two nodes and four service groups. In normal production
    > there will be two services running on each node. Each node of my system has
    > got two ge interfaces. My plan was to make a MILTINIC type in one of my
    > service groups, and then point to the MULTINIC via a proxy from the other
    > group. But what will happen when you do a fail-over of the group with the
    > MULTINIC????? How do you make the best and most flexible solution on this
    > setup?
    >
    > Hope somebody has got some input J
    >
    > Kindest regards
    >
    > RaZ



    The MultiNICA resource is of type "none" this means that VCS will only
    monitor the resource. Since VCS does not do an online or offline of the
    MultiNICA it will not be effected by a fail-over. The configuration
    your describing is a common one since having two MultiNICA resources
    monitoring the same set of interfaces does not work. Since the proxy
    agent will replicate the state of another resource on a per node basis
    it will cause a failover of what ever group it's in on that system. For
    example, node A and node B share service groups alpha and beta, group
    alpha has a MultiNICA resource that controls the two public interfaces
    for nodes A and B. In group beta a proxy has been setup to watch the
    MultiNICA resource in group alpha. If all the network public network
    cables are pulled on node B then the MultiNICA resource in group alpha
    will fault as will the proxy resource in group beta. The MultiNICA and
    proxy resources will still report as online on node A for both groups
    alpha and beta. When the network connections are restored on node B the
    MultiNICA resource will return to online automatically as will the proxy
    resource for groups alpha and beta on node B.

    This interaction is the second most complicated behavior in VCS

    Bill Borsari

    ** Any opinions expressed are my own and not of my employer **

  3. Re: Use of MILTINIC and proxy

    Hi William,

    I was just wondering, what is the most complicated behavior in VCS then??
    :-)

    Kindest regards

    RaZ
    "William Borsari" wrote in message
    news:3B0AC9BF.6508EAC3@veritas.com...
    > RaZ wrote:
    > >
    > > Hi there,
    > >
    > > I was wondering if anyone can help me with a little configuration

    problem. I
    > > have a setup with two nodes and four service groups. In normal

    production
    > > there will be two services running on each node. Each node of my system

    has
    > > got two ge interfaces. My plan was to make a MILTINIC type in one of my
    > > service groups, and then point to the MULTINIC via a proxy from the

    other
    > > group. But what will happen when you do a fail-over of the group with

    the
    > > MULTINIC????? How do you make the best and most flexible solution on

    this
    > > setup?
    > >
    > > Hope somebody has got some input J
    > >
    > > Kindest regards
    > >
    > > RaZ

    >
    >
    > The MultiNICA resource is of type "none" this means that VCS will only
    > monitor the resource. Since VCS does not do an online or offline of the
    > MultiNICA it will not be effected by a fail-over. The configuration
    > your describing is a common one since having two MultiNICA resources
    > monitoring the same set of interfaces does not work. Since the proxy
    > agent will replicate the state of another resource on a per node basis
    > it will cause a failover of what ever group it's in on that system. For
    > example, node A and node B share service groups alpha and beta, group
    > alpha has a MultiNICA resource that controls the two public interfaces
    > for nodes A and B. In group beta a proxy has been setup to watch the
    > MultiNICA resource in group alpha. If all the network public network
    > cables are pulled on node B then the MultiNICA resource in group alpha
    > will fault as will the proxy resource in group beta. The MultiNICA and
    > proxy resources will still report as online on node A for both groups
    > alpha and beta. When the network connections are restored on node B the
    > MultiNICA resource will return to online automatically as will the proxy
    > resource for groups alpha and beta on node B.
    >
    > This interaction is the second most complicated behavior in VCS
    >
    > Bill Borsari
    >
    > ** Any opinions expressed are my own and not of my employer **




  4. Re: Use of MILTINIC and proxy


    Service group dependanies.

    Bill Borsari

    ** Any opinions expressed are my own and not of my employer **

    RaZ wrote:
    >
    > Hi William,
    >
    > I was just wondering, what is the most complicated behavior in VCS then??
    > :-)
    >
    > Kindest regards
    >
    > RaZ
    > "William Borsari" wrote in message
    > news:3B0AC9BF.6508EAC3@veritas.com...
    > > RaZ wrote:
    > > >
    > > > Hi there,
    > > >
    > > > I was wondering if anyone can help me with a little configuration

    > problem. I
    > > > have a setup with two nodes and four service groups. In normal

    > production
    > > > there will be two services running on each node. Each node of my system

    > has
    > > > got two ge interfaces. My plan was to make a MILTINIC type in one of my
    > > > service groups, and then point to the MULTINIC via a proxy from the

    > other
    > > > group. But what will happen when you do a fail-over of the group with

    > the
    > > > MULTINIC????? How do you make the best and most flexible solution on

    > this
    > > > setup?
    > > >
    > > > Hope somebody has got some input J
    > > >
    > > > Kindest regards
    > > >
    > > > RaZ

    > >
    > >
    > > The MultiNICA resource is of type "none" this means that VCS will only
    > > monitor the resource. Since VCS does not do an online or offline of the
    > > MultiNICA it will not be effected by a fail-over. The configuration
    > > your describing is a common one since having two MultiNICA resources
    > > monitoring the same set of interfaces does not work. Since the proxy
    > > agent will replicate the state of another resource on a per node basis
    > > it will cause a failover of what ever group it's in on that system. For
    > > example, node A and node B share service groups alpha and beta, group
    > > alpha has a MultiNICA resource that controls the two public interfaces
    > > for nodes A and B. In group beta a proxy has been setup to watch the
    > > MultiNICA resource in group alpha. If all the network public network
    > > cables are pulled on node B then the MultiNICA resource in group alpha
    > > will fault as will the proxy resource in group beta. The MultiNICA and
    > > proxy resources will still report as online on node A for both groups
    > > alpha and beta. When the network connections are restored on node B the
    > > MultiNICA resource will return to online automatically as will the proxy
    > > resource for groups alpha and beta on node B.
    > >
    > > This interaction is the second most complicated behavior in VCS
    > >
    > > Bill Borsari
    > >
    > > ** Any opinions expressed are my own and not of my employer **


  5. Re: Use of MILTINIC and proxy


    One trick I have found when working with multiNic is to put the
    mulit-nic in its own service group, and throw a phantom resource
    on top of it. (Note, the IPMultiNic resource should not be in
    this group, it should be with the real service groups of your
    applications)
    This way

    1: All your real service groups use a proxy, so no one service
    group really owns the multi-nic resouce.
    2: For the truly sadistic, you can use a service group dependancy
    to make all your other service groups dependant on the multi-nic
    service group. You can then test failover of multiple groups
    by downing the multinic service group on a particular node.
    Any groups on that node should fail over. (I thought about doing
    this myself, but never actually did it. As the man said, service
    group depeancies are waaaaay too complex.)

    You really have to do this for a round-robin style of failover,
    as you cant guarentee that each node will be a member of each
    service group. Also keeps things sinple, all the nic resouces
    in one place.

    -Andrew


    "RaZ" wrote:
    >
    >Hi there,
    >
    >
    >
    >I was wondering if anyone can help me with a little configuration problem.

    I
    >have a setup with two nodes and four service groups. In normal production
    >there will be two services running on each node. Each node of my system

    has
    >got two ge interfaces. My plan was to make a MILTINIC type in one of my
    >service groups, and then point to the MULTINIC via a proxy from the other
    >group. But what will happen when you do a fail-over of the group with the
    >MULTINIC????? How do you make the best and most flexible solution on this
    >setup?
    >
    >
    >
    >Hope somebody has got some input J
    >
    >
    >
    >Kindest regards
    >
    >
    >
    >RaZ
    >
    >



+ Reply to Thread