|
<lvs-list-spam@xxxxxxxxx> writes:
> i thought about that. ifconfig doesn't have an option for full
> (or non-truncated) listings so i thought that was a dead end.
>
> here's something that is really weird.
>
> when i startup pulse and let all the virtual interfaces come up, then run:
>
> ifconfig eth0:13
>
> i get output, but no address. if i type
>
> ifconfig eth0:13 up
>
> it tells me it can't allocate the requested ip address.
>
> that was starting to look like a config problem, as you suggested. then i
> went in with a fine toothed comb and looked at all my ip's, grepped the
> config files by the last octet (in this case 238, in X.X.X.238) and found
> nothing. for grins i typed:
>
> ifconfig eth0:13 X.X.X.239 up
>
> and it came up fine.
>
> so i went thru the config files with a fine toothed comb _again_ and found
> no conflicts on either ip.
>
> i shut down pulse, changed the config file to put eth0:13 up on the next
> ip, X.X.X.239, and now everything works as expected. eth0:13 comes up,
> ifconfig reports it, etc. etc. too weird. an ip black hole.
>
> any thoughts?
You were probably bit by a broken ifconfig and/or ifup. RedHat
recently released an errata for it. ifconfig doesn't know about the
recent capability of a single interface answering to several IP
addresses (to be honest, I think that ability is a crock). Use "ip
addr ls" from the iproute package to see this and clear up the
situation.
Kjetil T.
|
