+++ This bug was initially created as a clone of Bug #434886 +++ Escalated to Bugzilla from IssueTracker -- Additional comment from tao on 2008-02-25 19:47 EST -- Description of problem: Netmask bit set to 32 in service IP How reproducible: Configure an IP in one cluster service Steps to Reproduce: Here is the cluster service configuration: <service domain="FirstDomain" name="ppr1" autostart="1" recovery="relocate"> <script name="ppr1" file="/usr/local/wsb/scripts/rhc_test1"/> <ip monitor_link="1" address="10.10.21.71"/> <fs device="/dev/sdd1" mountpoint="/usr/omg_ppr" fstype="ext3" force_unmount="1" name="/usr/omg_ppr"/> <ip monitor_link="1" address="10.10.21.138"/> </service> And here is the output of ip address show : bond0: <BROADCAST,MULTICAST,MASTER,UP> mtu 1500 qdisc noqueue link/ether 00:19:bb:3b:6c:b1 brd ff:ff:ff:ff:ff:ff inet 10.10.21.133/26 brd 10.10.21.191 scope global bond0 inet 10.10.21.138/32 scope global bond0 <<================= service ip 3: bond1: <BROADCAST,MULTICAST,MASTER,UP> mtu 1500 qdisc noqueue link/ether 00:1a:4b:ff:9c:e8 brd ff:ff:ff:ff:ff:ff inet 10.10.21.69/27 brd 10.10.21.95 scope global bond1 inet 10.10.21.71/32 scope global bond1 <<================= service ip Actual results: the netmask bit on the service IP is set to 32. Expected results: the netmask bit should be configurable in the IP service, currently there is no parameters available in /usr/share/cluster/ip.sh for setting the netmask and broadcast. The netmask could be also inherited by the first configured IP in the system which belongs to the same network Additional info: In this thread https://www.redhat.com/archives/linux-cluster/2008-February/msg00170.html 2 solutions are provided 1) set the netmask in the service ip , <ip monitor_link="1" address="10.10.21.138/26"/> 2) apply the provided patch Both solutions work-around the fact that the cluster scripts do not set the correct netmask if none is provided. This event sent from IssueTracker by tdunnon [SEG - Storage] issue 165004
An advisory has been issued which should help the problem described in this bug report. This report is therefore being closed with a resolution of ERRATA. For more information on therefore solution and/or where to find the updated files, please follow the link below. You may reopen this bug report if the solution does not work for you. http://rhn.redhat.com/errata/RHBA-2009-0101.html