Re: [tipc-discussion] Request: Unable to config second node onsame machine

[Suryanarayana G. <SGa...@go...>]

Hi Naresh,
For the scenario 3:
> scenario 3: two Ethernet interfaces eth0, eth1
> 
> Machine-1                                   Machine-2
> |------------- |                             |---------------|
> |  <1.1.1>  |                             |<1.1.2>     |
> |     eth0     |       ???                 | eth0          |
> |     eth1     |       ???                 | eth1          |
> ---------------                               ----------------

TIPC expects that there is connectivity between eth0-eth0 and eth1-eth1 and there is no
intermixing among them(means totally distinct Ethernet segements (or independent LANs, if you prefer)).
See the diagram below

 Machine-1                                   Machine-2
 |------------- |                             |---------------|
 |  <1.1.1>  |                          |<1.1.2>     |
 |     eth0     | <-------------------> | eth0          |
 |     eth1     | <-------------------> | eth1          |
 ---------------                               ----------------

Say connectivity between eth0-eth0 is broken, then TIPC messaging 
will be done on the eth1-eth1 link. TIPC automatically does the link
changeover, when it detects the failure on one link.

Regards
Surya


> -----Original Message-----
> From: nar...@wi... [mailto:nar...@wi...]
> Sent: Thursday, August 26, 2010 11:54 AM
> To: all...@wi...
> Cc: jon...@er...; Suryanarayana Garlapati; tipc-
> dis...@li...
> Subject: RE: [tipc-discussion] Request: Unable to config second node
> onsame machine
> 
> 
> Allan wrote:
> >
> >As Jon Maloy stated in his reply, if you want a node to have redundant
> >TIPC interfaces to Ethernet they have be on totally distinct Ethernet
> >segements (or independent LANs, if you prefer). You can picture this
> as:
> >
> >              |---<1.1.1>---|
> >              |             |
> >              |---<1.1.2>---|
> >             |             |
> >              |---<1.1.3>---|
> >            eth0          eth1
> >             LAN           LAN
> >
> >While you might be able to get some redundancy by eliminating the
> >distinct segments requirement, as in the following case:
> >
>  >             |---<1.1.1>---|
> >              |             |
> >              |---<1.1.2>---|
> >              |             |
> >              |---<1.1.3>---|
> >              |             |
> >              +-------------+
> >                single LAN
> >
> >you wouldn't be protected in the case that a single defective Ethernet
> >interface starts babbling away on the LAN and corrupts all traffic
> being
> >sent on the LAN. Having the requirement for totally isolated LANs
> means
> >that you're protected even in this case.
> 
> valuable information. thanks.
> let me give a picture of the same:
> 
> scenario 1: single Ethernet interface from eth0
> 
>   Machine-1                                  Machine-2
> |------------- |                             |---------------|
> |  <1.1.1>  |                              |<1.1.2>     |
> |     eth0     |<-------------------->| eth0          |
> ---------------                               ----------------
> Connection established between (<1.1.1>eth0; <1.1.2>eth0) working fine
> 
> scenario 2: single Ethernet interface from eth1
> 
> Machine-1                                   Machine-2
> |------------- |                             |---------------|
> |  <1.1.1>  |                              |<1.1.2>     |
> |     eth1     |<-------------------->| eth1          |
> ---------------                               ----------------
> Connection established between (<1.1.1>eth1; <1.1.2>eth1) working fine
> 
> scenario 3: two Ethernet interfaces eth0, eth1
> 
> Machine-1                                   Machine-2
> |------------- |                             |---------------|
> |  <1.1.1>  |                             |<1.1.2>     |
> |     eth0     |       ???                 | eth0          |
> |     eth1     |       ???                 | eth1          |
> ---------------                               ----------------
> 
> In Scenario 3, what are the probabilities for effective ways of
> communicating  Machines by TIPC.
> 
> May i know the backup plan for the connection, i mean if connection
> lost from one Ethernet interface what could be the ways to re-
> establishing connection curious about the Link Changeover mechanism.
> 
> Best regards
> Naresh Kamboju
> 
> >Regards,
> >Al
> 
> Please do not print this email unless it is absolutely necessary.
> 
> The information contained in this electronic message and any
> attachments to this message are intended for the exclusive use of the
> addressee(s) and may contain proprietary, confidential or privileged
> information. If you are not the intended recipient, you should not
> disseminate, distribute or copy this e-mail. Please notify the sender
> immediately and destroy all copies of this message and any attachments.
> 
> WARNING: Computer viruses can be transmitted via email. The recipient
> should check this email and any attachments for the presence of
> viruses. The company accepts no liability for any damage caused by any
> virus transmitted by this email.
> 
> www.wipro.com