[Pacemaker] Static vs dynamic IPs

[Borja Gª de Vinuesa Ordovás]

But, corosync can run with unicast aswell right? I'm deploying it on AWS
(Amazon Web Services) and they don't allow multicast.

2012/10/2 Lars Marowsky-Bree <lmb at suse.com>

> On 2012-10-02T19:28:28, Andrew Beekhof <andrew at beekhof.net> wrote:
>
> > > What are the implications of running Pacemaker with dynamic IP nodes?
> The IP
> > > would change on restart and all configuration would be wrong. Can it
> be done
> > > at all?
> > Nope.  Not because of pacemaker, but the underlying messaging layer
> > (heartbeat/corosync) wouldn't be able to find its peer when it comes
> > back up.
>
> As long as it's corosync with multicast (and the nodes still being able
> to communicate on the mcastaddr), it ought to be possible there.
>
> Mind, it isn't necessarily a great idea, but it should work. I'm not
> sure if statically assigned nodeids are going to be more reliable or
> not though.
>
>
> Regards,
>     Lars
>
> --
> Architect Storage/HA
> SUSE LINUX Products GmbH, GF: Jeff Hawn, Jennifer Guild, Felix
> Imendörffer, HRB 21284 (AG Nürnberg)
> "Experience is the name everyone gives to their mistakes." -- Oscar Wilde
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Pacemaker mailing list: Pacemaker at oss.clusterlabs.org
> http://oss.clusterlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/pacemaker
>
> Project Home: http://www.clusterlabs.org
> Getting started: http://www.clusterlabs.org/doc/Cluster_from_Scratch.pdf
> Bugs: http://bugs.clusterlabs.org
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.clusterlabs.org/pipermail/pacemaker/attachments/20121002/de26ecf9/attachment.htm>