Mailing List Archive: Static IPs required?

I am running wackamole on a set of dual-homed machines. They have a "backend"
interface with a private IP (which are free), and a frontend interface with a
public IP (which aren't free). I'd like to be able to use basically all of my
public IPs as VIPs -- is this possible?

My wackamole.conf specifies:

eth0:1.2.3.4/27
eth0:1.2.3.5/27

(public IPs), and my spread is configured to use the backend network for its
communication. Everything works fine if the eth0's are configured with some
other public IP at startup.

When I tried not starting eth0 at startup, wackamole correctly assigned a VIP
to eth0, but did not bring the interface up.

When I tried assigning 0.0.0.0 to eth0 at startup (meaning the OS brought it
up), wackamole again correctly assigned a VIP to eth0, but on a failure
(wackatrl -f), brought the interface down and refused to bring it back up on
recovery (wackatrl -s).

The only solution I can envision is to assign private IPs to eth0 at the OS
level, and let wackamole add its public VIPs as aliases to that. That seems
like a pretty gross hack, though. Is there any other way?

Incidentally, since I didn't say so on my last posts -- Wackamole and spread
are great stuff. When wackamole gets accepted into Gentoo I'll do a writeup
on the Gentoo wiki.

Dustin

_______________________________________________
wackamole-users mailing list
wackamole-users@lists.backhand.org
http://lists.backhand.org/mailman/listinfo/wackamole-users

On Oct 19, 2006, at 10:49 AM, Dustin J. Mitchell wrote:

> I am running wackamole on a set of dual-homed machines. They have
> a "backend"
> interface with a private IP (which are free), and a frontend
> interface with a
> public IP (which aren't free). I'd like to be able to use
> basically all of my
> public IPs as VIPs -- is this possible?
>
> My wackamole.conf specifies:
>
> eth0:1.2.3.4/27
> eth0:1.2.3.5/27
>
> (public IPs), and my spread is configured to use the backend
> network for its
> communication. Everything works fine if the eth0's are configured
> with some
> other public IP at startup.
>
> When I tried not starting eth0 at startup, wackamole correctly
> assigned a VIP
> to eth0, but did not bring the interface up.
>
> When I tried assigning 0.0.0.0 to eth0 at startup (meaning the OS
> brought it
> up), wackamole again correctly assigned a VIP to eth0, but on a
> failure
> (wackatrl -f), brought the interface down and refused to bring it
> back up on
> recovery (wackatrl -s).
>
> The only solution I can envision is to assign private IPs to eth0
> at the OS
> level, and let wackamole add its public VIPs as aliases to that.
> That seems
> like a pretty gross hack, though. Is there any other way?

Nope. Unfortunately, the code to bring an interface online is
obtusely different on every operating system as well. Two features
that would be great to have in wackamole are (1) full interface
management (bring it up and down if it is the first/last IP being
manipulated) and (2) route managment. The reason it is so important
to have an _actual_ routable IP address on the interface that is
managed by wackamole is that wackamole does not contain the code to
add back the default route (which is lost with the last IP removal).
The routing code is actually a bit easier than the interface up/down
issue. As with all OS projects: patches welcome.

> Incidentally, since I didn't say so on my last posts -- Wackamole
> and spread
> are great stuff. When wackamole gets accepted into Gentoo I'll do
> a writeup
> on the Gentoo wiki.

// Theo Schlossnagle
// CTO -- http://www.omniti.com/~jesus/
// OmniTI Computer Consulting, Inc. -- http://www.omniti.com/

_______________________________________________
wackamole-users mailing list
wackamole-users@lists.backhand.org
http://lists.backhand.org/mailman/listinfo/wackamole-users