Re: nopreempt not working - Keepalived 1.2.15

I should mention that Machine A has IP 10.21.7.5 (Priority 100) and Machine
B 10.21.7.4 (Prioriy 100).
I see in the code that the weight of the IP is also taken into
consideration:

https://github.com/acassen/keepalived/blob/18e7a036539b2137136311e1da1fd6f99662ad7d/keepalived/vrrp/vrrp.c

However cannot see in there where the nopreempt in taken into consideration
to not switch the VIP over to the newly rebooted machine....Might be
totally wrong though


On Thu, May 7, 2015 at 10:53 PM, krishnen chedambarum <[email protected]>
wrote:

> Hi Lennart,
>
> Thks...tried it with a different VIP 10.21.7.7, but still same issue...
> Anyway i can debug it any further to know exactly what happened?
>
> On Thu, May 7, 2015 at 10:32 PM, Lennart Sorensen <
> [email protected]> wrote:
>
>> On Thu, May 07, 2015 at 10:01:01PM +0400, krishnen chedambarum wrote:
>> > Hi All,
>> >
>> > Used latest release but getting a different problem:
>> >
>> > Machine B has VIP , When Machine A is rebooted, it acquires VIP when up.
>> >
>> > Message in logs for B is :
>> >
>> >
>> > May  8 01:51:10 host-02 Keepalived_vrrp[16032]: VRRP_Instance(VI_1)
>> > Received higher prio advert
>> > May  8 01:51:10 host-02 Keepalived_vrrp[16032]: VRRP_Instance(VI_1)
>> > Entering BACKUP STATE
>> > May  8 01:51:10 host-02 Keepalived_vrrp[16032]: VRRP_Instance(VI_1)
>> > removing protocol VIPs.
>> > May  8 01:51:10 host-02 Keepalived_healthcheckers[16031]: Netlink
>> reflector
>> > reports IP 10.21.7.6 removed
>> >
>> >
>> > Should'nt the priority be ignored when nopreempt is set?
>> >
>> > Thanks
>> >
>> > My Configs again:
>> >
>> > Machine A:
>> >
>> > vrrp_instance VI_1 {
>> >         interface eth0
>> >         state BACKUP
>> >         virtual_router_id 200
>> >         nopreempt
>> >         priority 150
>> >         authentication {
>> >             auth_type PASS
>> >             auth_pass bar
>> >         }
>> >         virtual_ipaddress {
>> >               10.21.7.6 dev eth0
>> >         }
>> >
>> >          notify_backup "/usr/local/sbin/ota-app-down.sh"
>> >         notify_master "/usr/local/sbin/ota-app-up.sh"
>> >
>> > }
>> >
>> > Machine B:
>> >
>> > vrrp_instance VI_1 {
>> >         interface eth0
>> >         state BACKUP
>> >        virtual_router_id 200
>> >         nopreempt
>> >         priority 100
>> >         authentication {
>> >             auth_type PASS
>> >             auth_pass bar
>> >         }
>> >         virtual_ipaddress {
>> >               10.21.7.6 dev eth0
>> >         }
>> >
>> >          notify_backup "/usr/local/sbin/ota-app-down.sh"
>> >         notify_master "/usr/local/sbin/ota-app-up.sh"
>> >
>> > }
>>
>> Any chance one of those routers owns 10.21.7.6 outside vrrp use?
>> After all the VRRP rule is that any router that owns an IP will always
>> be master if possible, even if nopreempt is set.
>>
>> --
>> Len Sorensen
>>
>
>

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
One dashboard for servers and applications across Physical-Virtual-Cloud 
Widest out-of-the-box monitoring support with 50+ applications
Performance metrics, stats and reports that give you Actionable Insights
Deep dive visibility with transaction tracing using APM Insight.
http://ad.doubleclick.net/ddm/clk/290420510;117567292;y

_______________________________________________
Keepalived-devel mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/keepalived-devel