Note: This bug is displayed in read-only format because the product is no longer active in Red Hat Bugzilla.
RHEL Engineering is moving the tracking of its product development work on RHEL 6 through RHEL 9 to Red Hat Jira (issues.redhat.com). If you're a Red Hat customer, please continue to file support cases via the Red Hat customer portal. If you're not, please head to the "RHEL project" in Red Hat Jira and file new tickets here. Individual Bugzilla bugs in the statuses "NEW", "ASSIGNED", and "POST" are being migrated throughout September 2023. Bugs of Red Hat partners with an assigned Engineering Partner Manager (EPM) are migrated in late September as per pre-agreed dates. Bugs against components "kernel", "kernel-rt", and "kpatch" are only migrated if still in "NEW" or "ASSIGNED". If you cannot log in to RH Jira, please consult article #7032570. That failing, please send an e-mail to the RH Jira admins at rh-issues@redhat.com to troubleshoot your issue as a user management inquiry. The email creates a ServiceNow ticket with Red Hat. Individual Bugzilla bugs that are migrated will be moved to status "CLOSED", resolution "MIGRATED", and set with "MigratedToJIRA" in "Keywords". The link to the successor Jira issue will be found under "Links", have a little "two-footprint" icon next to it, and direct you to the "RHEL project" in Red Hat Jira (issue links are of type "https://issues.redhat.com/browse/RHEL-XXXX", where "X" is a digit). This same link will be available in a blue banner at the top of the page informing you that that bug has been migrated.

Bug 1332692

Summary: Document avoiding DHCP for corosync nodes
Product: Red Hat Enterprise Linux 7 Reporter: Steven J. Levine <slevine>
Component: doc-High_Availability_Add-On_ReferenceAssignee: Steven J. Levine <slevine>
Status: CLOSED CURRENTRELEASE QA Contact: ecs-bugs
Severity: unspecified Docs Contact:
Priority: unspecified    
Version: 7.3CC: abeekhof, jruemker, kgaillot, rhel-docs
Target Milestone: rcKeywords: Documentation
Target Release: ---   
Hardware: Unspecified   
OS: Unspecified   
Whiteboard:
Fixed In Version: Doc Type: Bug Fix
Doc Text:
Story Points: ---
Clone Of: Environment:
Last Closed: 2016-11-07 21:35:48 UTC Type: Bug
Regression: --- Mount Type: ---
Documentation: --- CRM:
Verified Versions: Category: ---
oVirt Team: --- RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host:
Cloudforms Team: --- Target Upstream Version:
Embargoed:

Comment 2 Steven J. Levine 2016-09-15 16:17:26 UTC 
There was no obvious place to add this warning to the Pacemaker reference -- I could add a "considerations" section to the overview and include this, but at this point that would be the only consideration in that section.  Maybe as we come up with more...

So I added a note to the only place we really say anything about corosync, when we talk about the Pacemaker configuration files in Section 1.4.

Does this note address the problem?

http://jenkinscat.gsslab.pnq.redhat.com:8080/job/doc-Red_Hat_Enterprise_Linux-7-High_Availability_Add-On_Reference%20%28html-single%29/lastSuccessfulBuild/artifact/tmp/en-US/html-single/index.html#s1-installation-HAAR

(Looking at it again it still looks wrong.  But can I really have an entire section called "Do not use DHCP with corosync"?
Comment 3 Steven J. Levine 2016-09-15 16:27:01 UTC 
Update:  I do have another consideration: 16-node limit on clusters.

So I will add a section called something like "cluster configuration considerations" and move this note there, along with the node-limit.

I'll update this BZ when that gets done, in just a bit.
Comment 4 Steven J. Levine 2016-09-15 16:42:51 UTC 
The two new considerations are now section 1.5:

http://jenkinscat.gsslab.pnq.redhat.com:8080/job/doc-Red_Hat_Enterprise_Linux-7-High_Availability_Add-On_Reference%20%28html-single%29/lastSuccessfulBuild/artifact/tmp/en-US/html-single/index.html#s1-configfileoverview-HAAR

Ken: Could you look that new small section over for approval/review?
Comment 5 Ken Gaillot 2016-09-16 16:31:21 UTC 
(In reply to Steven J. Levine from comment #4)
> The two new considerations are now section 1.5:
> 
> http://jenkinscat.gsslab.pnq.redhat.com:8080/job/doc-
> Red_Hat_Enterprise_Linux-7-High_Availability_Add-On_Reference%20%28html-
> single%29/lastSuccessfulBuild/artifact/tmp/en-US/html-single/index.html#s1-
> configfileoverview-HAAR
> 
> Ken: Could you look that new small section over for approval/review?

The only change I would make is to say that the 16-node limit applies to full cluster nodes. The cluster may be expanded beyond that using Pacemaker Remote nodes.
Comment 6 Steven J. Levine 2016-09-16 18:54:08 UTC 
I have updated that caveat as follows:

Red Hat does not support cluster deployments greater than 16 full cluster nodes. It is possible, however, to scale beyond that limit with remote nodes running the pacemaker_remote service. For information on the pacemaker_remote service, see Section 9.3, “The pacemaker_remote Service”.