Linux - GeneralThis Linux forum is for general Linux questions and discussion.
If it is Linux Related and doesn't seem to fit in any other forum then this is the place.
Welcome to LinuxQuestions.org, a friendly and active Linux Community.
You are currently viewing LQ as a guest. By joining our community you will have the ability to post topics, receive our newsletter, use the advanced search, subscribe to threads and access many other special features. Registration is quick, simple and absolutely free. Join our community today!
Note that registered members see fewer ads, and ContentLink is completely disabled once you log in.
If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us. If you need to reset your password, click here.
Having a problem logging in? Please visit this page to clear all LQ-related cookies.
Introduction to Linux - A Hands on Guide
This guide was created as an overview of the Linux Operating System, geared toward new users as an exploration tour and getting started guide, with exercises at the end of each chapter.
For more advanced trainees it can be a desktop reference, and a collection of the base knowledge needed to proceed with system and network administration. This book contains many real life examples derived from the author's experience as a Linux system and network administrator, trainer and consultant. They hope these examples will help you to get a better understanding of the Linux system and that you feel encouraged to try out things on your own.
Click Here to receive this Complete Guide absolutely free.
Hi, I am having some really strange weirdness with a virtual IP. I have a RHAS box with iptables on it, eth0 being external interface bound on .100, eth1 is internal bound to .101, and a virtual IP on eth0 which is .102. I am running DNS/BIND on it and it's bound on all 3 IPs (waiting for my utility machine to show up, hence why we're using .102 so that clients don't have to change their registrar information). Everything worked fine for months, until yesterday, and there have been no known changes.
From the box itself, dns answers on .100, .101, and .102 no problem. Internally, .101 answers fine. Externally, only .100 answers, and .102 gives no answer. I set iptables to log queries, and nothing is going to .102 (but .101 and .100 are fine). I turned off iptables just to verify, and as far as I have been able to determine, it's not any firewall problem. I added a new virtual IP, .123, and it was having the same problem as .102. I even cannibalized a working IP from another machine to test and make sure it wasn't a particular IP. And the gateway router routes traffic fine.
It appears as if the virtual IP only works if you're looking at it from the host machine itself. There aren't any errors. Unfortunately, I can't really take the firewall down to test traffic easily lest I get pissed-off clients. A quick test with tcpdump didn't show any traffic (tcp or udp) for .102 when dns was requested. The machine has been rebooted, still no-go.
I found something really interesting this morning, a feature with the linux 2.2-2.4 kernels. Basically, if you have more than one NIC on the same physical network, such as eth0 and eth1 on the same switch, then eth1 can answer arp for eth0 and vice versa. There is a patch for it, which I haven't done yet, since the overall plan was to move eth1 on a separate physical network than eth0 (but I couldn't due to not having equipment at the time).
This is what I was seeing on tcpdump... eth1 was answering arp to eth0 and the router would be confused and use the wrong MAC address.
I believe the reason I hadn't seen this behavior before was that I didn't have much traffic on that network at the time. We moved a few webservers with high traffic to that network (changing datacenters) and suddenly this behavior shows up.
If you'd like, I'll post my results after I'm able to co-ordinate with the router guys some static routes...
You don't need to post it for my sake (although I will definitely remember that this situation is possible -- we use multiple NICs in most of our machines, and they all go pretty much to the same switch.)
If you think it will help out somebody else, please do post it. I hate Googling for a problem and finding nothing but somebody else 6 months ago who had the same problem (and no answer!).