Multiple NICs (network cards)

Hi,
Does anyone know how to open a Socket (Datagram) on a specific network card using Java on linux.
Thanks,
Dave

err. ~scratches head~ ~remembers~
cant do it :-)
there is a disputed bug whereby you can only open the socket on all interfaces or just the first one
pretty sure thats how it goes.....
i tried this ages ago ~10 months~ and thats where i decided to leave it since it seemed like it dosent work quite right
brb, ill try to look up the bug report...
dang, lost it
and i was thinking of a ServerSocket
but sounds like the same prob.....

Similar Messages

MULTIPLE LISTENER의 LOAD BALANCING 및 2개의 NETWORK CARD 사용 시 SETUP

제품 : SQL*NET
작성날짜 : 1997-11-24
MULTIPLE LISTENER의 LOAD BALANCING 및 2개의 NETWORK CARD 사용 시 SETUP
=====================================================================
Oracle V7.3의 SQL*Net 2.3의 새로운 기능으로 여러 개의 Listener를 띄우면서
상호 Load Balancing을 유지하는 기능을 소개하고자 한다.
Load Balancing 기능을 이용하여 각각의 Listener와 Oracle Instance 간의
Overloading을 줄일 수 있다.
다음의 예는 하나의 장비 내에 2개의 Network Card가 있을 경우에 대해 setup을
하는 방법이며 만일 하나의 Network Card가 있을 경우는 Host는 하나만 지정
하면 된다.
1. init<SID>.ora file을 지정할 Parameter
MTS_MULTIPLE_LISTENERS=TRUE
COMPATIBLE=7.3.2.0
2. 예를 들어 Listener를 2개 사용하는 경우라면 initSID.ora에
mts_dispatchers="tcp,10"
mts_max_dispatchers=20
mts_servers=20
mts_max_servers=40
mts_service=ORA73
mts_listener_address="(address_list=
(address=(protocol=tcp)(port=1621)(host=152.69.30.100))
mts_listener_address="(address_list=
(address=(protocol=tcp)(port=1622)(host=152.69.30.100))
mts_listener_address="(address_list=
(address=(protocol=tcp)(port=1623)(host=152.69.30.102))
mts_listener_address="(address_list=
(address=(protocol=tcp)(port=1624)(host=152.69.30.102))
3. listener.ora file에 설정되는 내용은
LISTENER1 =
(ADDRESS_LIST =
(ADDRESS =
(PROTOCOL = tcp)
(HOST = 152.69.30.100)
(PORT=1621)
(ADDRESS =
(PROTOCOL = tcp)
(HOST = 152.69.30.100)
(PORT=1622)
LISTENER2 =
(ADDRESS_LIST =
(ADDRESS =
(PROTOCOL = tcp)
(HOST = 152.69.30.102)
(PORT=1623)
(ADDRESS =
(PROTOCOL = tcp)
(HOST = 152.69.30.102)
(PORT=1624)
SID_LIST_LISTENER1 =
(SID_LIST =
(SID_DESC =
(SID_NAME = ORA73)
(ORACLE_HOME=/oracle2/ora73/app/oracle/product/7.3.2)
SID_LIST_LISTENER2 =
(SID_LIST =
(SID_DESC =
(SID_NAME = ORA73)
(ORACLE_HOME=/oracle2/ora73/app/oracle/product/7.3.2)
STARTUP_WAIT_TIME_LISTENER1 = 0
STARTUP_WAIT_TIME_LISTENER2 = 0
CONNECT_TIMEOUT_LISTENER1 = 0
CONNECT_TIMEOUT_LISTENER2 = 0
4. tnsnames.ora file에 설정되는 내용들
* 다수의 port에 Random하게 접속하는 경우
RANDOM =
(DESCRIPTION_LIST =
(DESCRIPTION =
(ADDRESS_LIST =
(ADDRESS =
(PROTOCOL = TCP)
(Host = 152.69.30.100)
(Port = 1621)
(CONNECT_DATA =
(SID = ORA73)
(DESCRIPTION =
(ADDRESS_LIST =
(ADDRESS =
(PROTOCOL = TCP)
(Host = 152.69.30.100)
(Port = 1622)
(CONNECT_DATA =
(SID = ORA73)
(DESCRIPTION =
(ADDRESS_LIST =
(ADDRESS =
(PROTOCOL = TCP)
(Host = 152.69.30.102)
(Port = 1623)
(CONNECT_DATA =
(SID = ORA73)
(DESCRIPTION =
(ADDRESS_LIST =
(ADDRESS =
(PROTOCOL = TCP)
(Host = 152.69.30.102)
(Port = 1624)
(CONNECT_DATA =
(SID = ORA73)
* 개개의 Port로 접속하는 경우
TORA1 =
(DESCRIPTION =
(ADDRESS_LIST =
(ADDRESS =
(PROTOCOL = TCP)
(Host =krrcsun)
(Port = 1621)
(CONNECT_DATA =
(SID = ORA73)
TORA2 =
(DESCRIPTION =
(ADDRESS_LIST =
(ADDRESS =
(PROTOCOL = TCP)
(Host =krrcsun)
(Port = 1622)
(CONNECT_DATA =
(SID = ORA73)
TORA3 =
(DESCRIPTION =
(ADDRESS_LIST =
(ADDRESS =
(PROTOCOL = TCP)
(Host =krrcsun)
(Port = 1623)
(CONNECT_DATA =
(SID = ORA73)
TORA4 =
(DESCRIPTION =
(ADDRESS_LIST =
(ADDRESS =
(PROTOCOL = TCP)
(Host =krrcsun)
(Port = 1624)
(CONNECT_DATA =
(SID = ORA73)
5. 각각의 Listener를 띄우는 방법
$ lsnrctl start LISTENER1
$ lsnrctl start LISTENER2

EthernetIP, Unable to connect to the network path specified, Multiple NICs

I have not been able to find an answer concerning this error, so I am hoping someone can help.
Computer has LabVIEW 2013 with the NI-Industrial Communications for EtherNet/IP 1.2.1 addon with Win XP although I have verified the same setup with Win 7 x32 with the same results. I am using the EthernetIP CIP Get Attribute Single.vi and the corresponding "Set" vi.
I am using a pc with five network cards, one for the corporate network (dhcp) and four that are connected to four Rockwell PowerFlex 700S AC variable drives via CAT6 crossover cables. Each 700S drive controls a motor in an engine dyno teststand. The 700S drives have the latest available firmware installed. The four NIC/700S pairs have hard coded IP addresses with the appropriate subnet masks for proper routing. I can use the Windows "ping" command without errors. The program uses a QSM-PC architecture which I have four separate qsm loops that "talk" to the each drive, those loops constantly request three parameters from the drive, a boolean drive status array, the rpm , and the torque every 250ms using the CIP "Get" vi. That data is then sent to the main front panel via shared variables. When the operator wants to say change the rpm, a write command is inserted into the queue, and the CIP "Set" vi is used.
My problem is when I start the program, it is hit or miss on whether these loops will begin to loop through their states. If they start, the program is rock solid. When one of the loops does not start, which is most of the time, the error returned is the "-251723767 Unable to connect to the network path specified". See the attached pictures. So if I disable three of the four loops, the error never shows up. Adding another loop or more will cause the error. Slowing down the request rate does not fix the issue and it is not always the same loop that will throw the error. Each qsm loop has its own session name and its own action engine with the only common thing amongst the action engines would be the "Get" and "Set" EthernetIP VIs.
No more ideas.....Kevin
Attachments:
error.PNG ‏12 KB
clone_error.PNG ‏30 KB

250 ms is a pretty slow update rate for CIP so Why use a nic for each drive? Use 1 drive nic in your PC and use a network switch to connect with your drives. If You have more then 1 nic you need to specify the nic to use for each loop for each drive IP address so the drive and the loops are using the correct IP settings. You should be able to use as low as 30 ms updates with no problems.

Multiple Network Card Question

I've got a Pc which has both a ethernet card and a wireless dongle used at different times.
In the setup for the 2Wire.com router I get the PC name listed twice ,once for each network card, understanable in a way I suppose as they have different identities on the LAN. But, when I'm making settings for the PC in the setup, I don't know which one I'm making the setting for - the PC name is just listed. How should I be doing this?

Don't worry, I've re-posted this in the business forum, as I think that#s where it should be.

Different afp shares for different network cards (NIC)

Hi,
I have a machine sharing via two connections on two separate physical connectors.
One is restricted to LAN, the other is allowed to use the internet connection.
How do I set up shares only available on the LAN connection?
Thanks

Sorry it took me so long to answer, I've been busy lately....I've found a solution to the problem I mentioned, and just in case anyone has similar problems in the future, I'll shortly describe what happened.
As Caseyw suggested, it was necessary to enable both network cards through the Measurement and Automation Explorer. The cause of the connections malfunction was actually that I wasn't using the "right" protocol for the Modbus communication, which ran on the secondary adapter. The solution was to use the URL protocol with the correct path on the field, addressing the right IP address. To avoid making this post a mixture of topics, I won't elaborate futher, but I got the gist of it, so if anyone is having similar problems whether it is working with several network cards or with Modbus communication protocols, feel free to contact me, I'll be glad to help.
Thanks

Configure multiple network card with netcfg

Hello Archers! I am a happy new user of Arch Linux . I wanna say that your community is really great, thanks to all the people giving help out there.
My question is:
I must configure two eth interfaces, I have the both configured but sometimes I need to change configuration for connecting to other network that needs only one network card with other IP. I would like to select the configuration trough the "NET_PROFILES=menu" line in /etc/rc.conf or with the "netcfg" command but I don't know how to configure TWO interfaces in ONE profile of the /etc/network-profiles/* files?
Both networks have Static IP.
I search on the forums and do not find anything useful. I'm sorry if is there something in other post that I doesn't read.
Last edited by gooze (2007-02-01 07:00:26)

TuxLyn,
this netcfg profile works OK for me for a long time now:
CONNECTION="ethernet"
DESCRIPTION="Bridge: nVidia Corporation MCP55 Ethernet (rev a2)"
INTERFACE=eth1
#HOSTNAME="archabit64"
IP="dhcp"
DHCP_TIMEOUT=15
DHCP_OPTIONS="-C resolv.conf"
DHCLIENT=no
POST_UP="ip addr add 192.168.2.115/24 broadcast 192.168.2.255 dev eth1"
Of course, yours is more circunvoluted, but perhaps it helps.
ip addr outputs:
eth1: <BROADCAST,MULTICAST,UP,LOWER_UP> mtu 1500 qdisc pfifo_fast state UP qlen 1000
link/ether 00:50:8d:9a:bc:2f brd ff:ff:ff:ff:ff:ff
inet 192.168.2.140/24 brd 192.168.2.255 scope global eth1
inet 192.168.2.115/24 brd 192.168.2.255 scope global secondary eth1
inet6 fe80::250:8dff:fe9a:bc2f/64 scope link
valid_lft forever preferred_lft forever
Mektub

Weblogic Cluster on a machine with multiple NIC

Out Setup
          One Quad Machine
          2 NIC - one ip address on each
          Two weblogic installations
          Each Instance is listening on one address and port 7001.(managed servers)
          Admin Server on one of the ip and port 8001
          Both managed servers part of a cluster.
          While i check weblogic console i see both the managed server
          having almost same number of frames incoming and outgoing.
          If i check 4 processers all 4 of them working eqaully same
          during out load test..(almost 85%)
          But i check NICs only one of them seems to be working really hard..
          and another one so..so.. what could be the problem??


          Weblogic 7 has a new concept called network channel, where there is a section talking
          about clustering over multiple NIC cards. I was confused by the cluster address in
          customized network channel (no example there). I tried to use multiple NIC cards
          for the purpose of network failover, but failed in clustering environment, although
          I succeed in single server environment.
          Kumar Allamraju <[email protected]> wrote:
          >You can set Interface address via admin console's
          >Cluster >> {Cluster Name }
          >
          >on the right hand side you will find InterfaceAddress box.
          >
          >--
          >Kumar
          >
          >zevit wrote:
          >
          >>>It's the JVM & OS who will take adv. of multiple NIC's. We don't have
          >>>anything in WLS that does this thing.
          >>>
          >>>Alternatively you can bind each WLS instance to a specific NIC card
          >>>to effeciently utilize each NIC card.
          >>>
          >>
          >> thank u kumar.. Could u please tell me how do i bind each WSL instance
          >> to a specific NIC ?
          >>
          >

Bonjour not finding anything from PC with Multiple NICs

We have two Network Interface Cards in each workstation at work to access two separate Physical Networks. Both networks provide access to ZeroConf (Bonjour) IP Printers.
Bonjour discovery fails intermittently on the two different networks. Occasionally Printers on one network, the other network, both or neither are visible from various workstations.
Is mDNSResponder aware of multiple NICs? Is there a way to force mDNSResponder to only search for printers on a particular subnet?

The second network adapter was installed after the VPC, indeed.
In the dropdown menu in the VPC networking settings there was only one network adapter to chose because the description for both physical network cards were the same. Therefore I cannot assign for virtual NICs different physical network adapters.
Finally I coped with the problem:
- I uninstalled one of the adapters (removing the drivers, too),
- edited the INF file in the adapter drivers and changed the description of the adapter
- I reinstalled the adapter with the altered driver (with the INF file changed).
Then, in the VPC networking settings both physical adapters appeared (one with the altered description).
I Wonder if that will cause any problems later ;)
Thanks for your replies :)

Network Card Teaming for the Home

Sadly microsoft is way behind the other competing OS's in this field.
Sure you may say that your server versions offer this but the home needs its too. Why you might ask. The answer is Bluray and eventually 4k movies. I copy them to my freebsd plex server for home viewing. I'd prefer not
to let teenagers ruin my bluray disks. I copy them once and then store them safely away.
My freebsd plex server has 3 1 Gig links to my home cisco 24 port Gig switch which connects by 3 Gig links to my 8 port cisco switch and the 3 nics in my FX8350 box. This works fine in linux and freebsd , but unless
I have identical cards and can run the manufacturers teaming software I am basically screwed in windows and back to single links.
You may say that I'm disk bound anyway, but I have a a 4 X 3 Terabyte disk ZFS system in their version of RAID 0 which is rysnced to four identical pools both local and remote over a 5ghz wifi link.
Don't restrict us and blame issues with response times as I've read. Just let us use it as an option and we'll make our own judgement. After over 30 years of computer experience I can cope. Remember us baby boomers
like your founder. I am currently downloading the enterprise version to see if it has the capability.
I have read many comments about this and I totally agree with them.
This is not only your chance not only to catch up with what currently appears to be your technical superiors but also provide a compelling reason to upgrade from Windows 7 for technically expert users.
Oh btw I do really like windows 10, no issues so far, but please fix this. Pretty please :D
Cheers
Phil

On Thu, 25 Dec 2014 01:09:56 +0000, S33kr wrote:
Oh by the way your clarification was more like obfuscation. Its not about streaming media , its about Teaming Network Cards to create multiple gig LACP channels. I've changed the title to reflect that.
I don't think that Microsoft is too concerned about losing consumer sales
due to any lack of native teaming in its consumer level OS'. If one
absolutely requires NIC teaming on a consumer OS then the solution for
Windows is to purchase multiple NICs from the same vendor that support
teaming and use their configuration utility to create and manage the team.
Teaming, at the consumer level, is an extreme outlier and as I said, I'm
sure that Microsoft isn't losing any sleep over any lost sales to due its
lack of native teaming in the client OS.
Paul Adare - FIM CM MVP
You should never anthropomorphize computers; they hate that. -- Skud

Multiple NIC Issues

Hello everyone. I'm in the process of certifying a system with four dual-port gigabit ethernet ports. I can pass all tests with only one of those dual-port cards enabled, but when I have any more I fail the test.
My question is has anybody had any luck with >2 NICS using the same driver? Specifically an Intel e1000g driver?
-James

Kevin, will this fix the problems with trying to do installations with
multiple NICs, or is that still out there??
"KBOYLE" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]..
>
> The developers have apparently resolved this issue in an upcoming patch.
> When the patch is applied you will be able to:
>
>
> - Click on Advanced Settings to list all Network Interfaces.
> - Select the radio button corresponding to the network interface you
> would like simba to use
> - Select/de-select network interfaces you do/do not want to be
> touched.
>
> I don't know when the patch will be released into the channel. You will
> know that the patch has been applied by checking from a terminal console
> what revision of Simba is installed.
> Code:
> --------------------
> server:~ # rpm -q simba
> simba-2.5-r1921
>
> --------------------
>
>
> --
> Kevin Boyle
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> KBOYLE's Profile: http://forums.novell.com/member.php?userid=19359
> View this thread: http://forums.novell.com/showthread.php?t=404451
>

Controlling Two Network Card by LabVIEW

Hi,
I'm using LabVIEW 8.5 and Windows XP.
I am intending to use LabVIEW to control a PC with 2 network cards in it.
I want to send TCP/IP packet out from one network card,
and receive the packet from another network card.
Do I have to change the confguration of the XP system?
How can I assign those two different cards to send and receive individually?
Can anyone tell or suggest what to do for me
Thank you very much~ ^^

You will not be able to directly prohibit the network cards from receiving or transmitting. You can define your network routes on the PC to route the traffic in the manner you want. Each network adapter will need to have its own IP address. NI's Internet Tool kit has a few issues, most notably the FTP VIs, when using multiple NICs. In addition, any DNS requests made will be routed to the primary network card. Windows determines which interface it thinks is the primary interface. From a code perspective using the native TCP or UDP VIs you will not have to do anything special.
Mark Yedinak
"Does anyone know where the love of God goes when the waves turn the minutes to hours?"
Wreck of the Edmund Fitzgerald - Gordon Lightfoot

Teamed network cards for domain controllers?

can someone help me to resolve a debate we have: my colleage states that domain controllers (in our case Win2003SP2) should "not" have their network cards teamed for high availability (via HP's NIC teaming software).? I've not heard of this and cannot Bing/Google anything like this. I'm under the impression that a domain controller "should" have it's gigabit NICs teamed to make sure that directory services are highly available.
any information on this would be great. thanks...Peter A. Berger Jr.

Fault Tolerance and Network Teaming
                Anyone who has called Microsoft for help with a networking problem has likely heard the question: "Are you using network teaming?" I have often heard this referred to by Microsoft's customers as a "quick out" or an excuse that Microsoft was looking to pass the responsibility on to someone else. As someone that has been on both ends of the phone, and at the highest escalation point within Microsoft's Network queues I can tell you that it is a question born of wisdom and tempered with experience. While working the phones at Microsoft, supporting the largest and most critical systems in the US it was rare to ever get a call about the same problem more than once. Even more rare was for everyone on our group to get the same calls, and have the same experiences. I recall it happening when we fought the blaster worm, and when Microsoft's "Scalable Networking Pack" was released with 2003 SP2. These were bad, but a few months went by and except for a few straggles the phone calls stopped, the world got wise to the issue and the problem was resolved. I was amazed though to experience 1-3 calls a week with network issues CAUSED by network teaming. I could not help but be blown away by the irony of a program meant to avoid network failure so often causing it. I talked to colleagues, (of which I have found no better single source in the industry than at Microsoft), and found that even the old timers having more than 15 years with the company had the same stories of problems caused by networking teaming as we are constantly experiencing today. I am amazed that an industry as wise and agile as the computer industry has been (and is), has stuck with such a poor technology. I always asked my customers as the called with problems, usually critical ones, "What is teaming these network cards getting you". Almost unanimously the answer would come fault tolerance, to which I would reply rhetorically "How often do you NICs or Switches fail and how often has teaming caused network failure?" In my opinion, it is unforgivable for an application to constantly cause the problem that it is written to avoid. It should cause pause and reflection as to whether the technology is well suited for its function, whether it is just written poorly or if all of its implementations have similar problems. Technology today is beyond network teaming. There are far better methods of providing fault tolerance with manual and automatic failover. Most application writers have taken into consideration fault tolerance at the service level superseding anything that network teaming offers, so that network teaming should be a dead technology, because it is killing us.
                Finally, if you are considering using network teaming, or have had reason to reconsider its use, maybe these questions will help your assessment:
                What is my goal with using network teaming?
                Can I gain Availability through use of a more capable NIC card?
                How often have my NIC cards failed?
                When NIC cards have failed were they the only failure, or was it in conjunction with a Motherboard or other failure causing the service to be unavailable?
                What are my needs for uptime for these services?
                Would a manual failover (the simplest of options) be viable for this service?
                What options for automatic failover do I have (since most applications can have multiple providers through configuration)?
                One other note to add. While working on the phones at Microsoft, and later as a consultant to large and federal organizations, I found one thing that seemed to be true most of the time. When a problem occurred, it was rarely the OS itself, but something unnatural to its processes. Simplicity and minimalism is really one of the keys to a healthy server and environment. Often it is necessary to introduce other applications and services, but I do not think near as often as we do.
Note: MSFT does not support network teaming, because they do not own the software that provides it. In certain instances though, like with OCS, they flat out will not support OCS if teaming is enabled on the server.
Note2: I realize my comments above are very general, and so I want to apply these to this exact question. When I consider AD and how to make it fault tolerant, I cannot help but realize that the protocols, clients and services that make up Directory Services, are beautifully fault tolerant. In most cases, the loss of any one DC would not greatly affect the user's ability to authenticate to a computer or service within the domain. Even more, Directory services is inherently so fault tolerant that it can still function with the loss of a major part of the servers that make it up.
Don't forget to give credit where credit is due, vote this as helpful if it helped you.

Select TCP UDP route to multiple NIC

I have two NIC cards (Broadcom & Realtek) installed in my system (Windows XP x64) running LV 8.6 Dev Suite. Whenever I send/receive TCP or UDP traffic, labview always uses the broadcom card. Is there a way to work around this issue so I specify which NIC to use? This is a big deal for me because I'm required to utilize multiple NIC cards for my works. Thanks

Since at least LaVIEW 8.5 there is an extra input "net address" on the TCP Create Listener and UDP Open that allows you to define the network address to bind the underlaying socket to. You shouldn't need that for TCP Open Connection since at connection establishment the according interface is selected automatically based on the routing requirements for the specified remote address.
Rolf Kalbermatter
CIT Engineering Netherlands
a division of Test & Measurement Solutions

RE: Is there a way to have 2 network cards on the samemachine

Sean,
I mean I am always connecting to the nodemgr of the 2nd environment
successfully. Only when I run the client part of the application that I know
is up, I get a response from the Name Server that it is actually the first
IP address.
I checked again. I defenitely have FORTE_NS_ADDRESS set to IP:5004, in my
case, and not the hostname. I don't have FORTE_LOCATIONS set any where. the
NS_ADDRESS for env2 has only 1 IP address associated with it. My Forte
Control Panel on the client, and hence the NS address has only one entry.
I tried going into escript like you said, and the name service still thinks
it is IP1.
Venkat Kodumudi
Price Waterhouse LLP
Internet: [email protected]
Internet2: [email protected]
-----Original Message-----
From: Sean Brown [SMTP:[email protected]]
Sent: Monday, June 22, 1998 1:31 PM
To: Venkat Kodumudi; 'Sean Brown'
Cc: [email protected]
Subject: RE: Is there a way to have 2 network cards on the same
machine
Hmmmm? That is a little odd! Let me rehash what I think you are saying.
You now have two environments each with their own name service with
FORTE_NS_ADDRESS set to a different IP:Port combination. For example you
are doing the steps:
FORTE_NS_ADDRESS=255.255.255.1:5000
start the nodemgr for env 1
FORTE_NS_ADDRESS=255.255.255.2:5000
start the nodemgr for env 2
Now when you start a client you are always getting the address for env 1
back from the nodemgr. I assume you actually mean the name service? Or, do
you mean you are always connecting to the nodemgr & name service for env
1?
If the first scenario is the case and you are connecting to the nodemgr
for
env 2 but getting back IP's for services listening on the card for env 1 I
would ask you what you are setting the FORTE_LOCATIONS value to before you
start each service. If you are not setting it or are using the host name
it
will register using the IP for the primary network card associated with
the
machine name and I am again assuming that this is env 1. You need to set
the FORTE_LOCATIONS variable to 255.255.255.2:0 (based on the steps above)
before starting your services.
If the second scenario is the case I would have you check what the
FORTE_NS_ADDRESS is set to before you start up the client. Once again it
must be the IP:Port combination not host:port combination if you want to
get
anything other than the primary card.
I would also suggest that you do the following. After everything is up
and
running execute the following commands:
escript -fns "ip for env1":port
findsub nameservice
showpart
What you should see is everything currently registered under the name
service. It will have the name and any "locations" (IP and port) that it
is
registered as listening on. I would look for the nodemgr and see where it
has advertised itself. I would then look for any services you expect to
be
registered there and also verify where the have advertised themselves. If
there are multiple locations listed for any one service, the client will
use
the first one in the list.
Do the same for env 2.
Sean
-----Original Message-----
From: Venkat Kodumudi [mailto:[email protected]]
Sent: Monday, June 22, 1998 9:57 AM
To: 'Sean Brown'
Cc: [email protected]
Subject: RE: Is there a way to have 2 network cards on the same machine
I am giving the actual IP address. and not the host name. That is why I
don't understand what is going on.
Venkat Kodumudi
Price Waterhouse LLP
Internet: [email protected]
Internet2: [email protected]
-----Original Message-----
From: Sean Brown [SMTP:[email protected]]
Sent: Monday, June 22, 1998 10:53 AM
To: Venkat Kodumudi; 'Sean Brown'
Cc: [email protected]
Subject: RE: Is there a way to have 2 network cards on the same
machine
Hello Venkat,
I probably should have mentioned this before. Your are correct. Forteis
doing a host lookup if you are providing a name for examplemachine1:5000.
You can bypass the host lookup by using the actual ip dot addressinstead
for example 255.255.255.255:5000. This way you are taking the name
service
out od the picture and Forte will use the address provided.
Sean
-----Original Message-----
From: Venkat Kodumudi [mailto:[email protected]]
Sent: Monday, June 22, 1998 9:27 AM
To: 'Sean Brown'
Cc: [email protected]
Subject: RE: Is there a way to have 2 network cards on the same machine
My requirement is that my second card serves as best case performance
testing piece. This eliminates the network completely. We went one step
ahead and created a new enviromnent for the second card. Whatever I do,
the
nodemgr is returning back the IP address of the first card, even thoughmy
FORTE_NS_ADDRESS does not have the first card in the picture any where.
I think Forte is doing a host look up and returning the first IP address
it
finds, as opposed to returning the IP address specified in theenvironment
variable FORTE_NS_ADDRESS. Is there a way to trick it?
Venkat Kodumudi
Price Waterhouse LLP
Internet: [email protected]
Internet2: [email protected]
-----Original Message-----
From: Sean Brown [SMTP:[email protected]]
Sent: Thursday, June 18, 1998 9:54 AM
To: Venkat Kodumudi
Cc: [email protected]
Subject: RE: Is there a way to have 2 network cards on the same
machine
OK, you ran into one of the issues. That is, if both addresses areknown
to
the client that is trying to contact the partition it will always usethe
first address in FORTE_LOCATIONS. This is because FORTE_LOCATIONS was
designed more as a failover mechanism. So it will always try the
first
address in the list and if it succeeds, there is no reason to move onto
the
second.
Now, the second issue is that there is currently a problem with theclient
failover to the secondary address in FORTE_LOCATIONS. If the firstentry
fails it is supposed to retry on the second entry. Instead, it
retries
the
first entry again. I know that Forte knows about this but I do nothave
a
bug number on it.
With that said, lets look at a possible solution for you. If the real
objective here is to have a back up network card available for fail
over
on
the same machine, or use one card to advertise outside your firewalland
one
to use inside, then you will have to contact Forte to determine whenthe
failover problem will be fixed. But, if the objective is to loadbalance
across the network cards you could have the environment manager listenon
both ports and then alternate your server partitions across both
cards.
For
example:
set FORTE_NS_ADDRESS=card1:5000;card2:5000 and then start up the
environment
manager
set FORTE_LOCATIONS=card1:0 (the 0 in the port causes the OS to pick a
port)
and start partition one
set FORTE_LOCATIONS=card2:0 and start partition two
and so on....
In this scenario the environment manager will be listening on bothcards
but
each server will be listening on only one of the two cards. So if a
request
comes in for partition1 it will go through card one and if it is for
partition two it will go through card two. You could assign your
partitions
to cards based on expected load.
Well, I am done. I hope this helps!
Sean
-----Original Message-----
From: Venkat Kodumudi [mailto:[email protected]]
Sent: Thursday, June 18, 1998 8:06 AM
To: 'Sean Brown'; 'John Jamison'
Cc: [email protected]; Jose Suriol
Subject: RE: Is there a way to have 2 network cards on the samemachine
Sean,
Thanks for your reply. I tried the approach. I was not very specificin
my
question. I do need the ability for server applications to listen and
server
on both the network cards.
I was succesfully able to make the nodemgr listen on both the cardsand
actually serve requests coming in from both the cards. But, followingyour
advise, I took a cautious step with FORTE_LOCATIONS. Here is what I
noticed.
I have an application that has 6 partitions in total. I used
FORTE_LOCATION
to make it listen on 1. Both the cards. 2. Swapped the IP addresses
for
both
cards for this application. 3. One card that I want it to listen on. I
tried
all approaches by exporting the locations variable for just this
application. The nodemgr recieves a request from this pc connected onthe
second card to talk to one of the partitions. The node mgr responds
with
a
proxy - with the ip address and socket number of the first card. The
FORTE_NS_ADDRESS variable looks like this:
IP1:5002;IP2:5002.
Is it possible atall to resolve my problem, without having a seperate
environment?
Thanks
Venkat Kodumudi
Price Waterhouse LLP
Internet: [email protected]
Internet2: [email protected]
-----Original Message-----
From: Sean Brown [SMTP:[email protected]]
Sent: Wednesday, June 17, 1998 10:42 AM
To: 'John Jamison'; Venkat Kodumudi
Cc: [email protected]
Subject: RE: Is there a way to have 2 network cards on the
same
machine
Venkat,
Actually, it is possible for Forte to listen on more than one IP andport
combination. The first reply to your message was correct. If you
set
the
FORTE_NS_ADDRESS to contain multiple entries before starting the
name
service, it will advertise on both. For Forte servers you use the
FORTE_LOCATIONS env variable to get it to advertise on multipleip:port
combinations.
We were doing something very similar with another customer I was at
to
get
around a firewall. I will warn you that there are some issues with
FORTE_LOCATIONS that may keep that portion from working. However,
from
reading your note, it appears that all you need is for the nameservice
to
advertise and listen on multiple ports and that works fine. I justtested
it again for sanity sake and it worked. I ran my test on NT using
Forte
3G2.
Sean
-----Original Message-----
From: [email protected]
[<a href="mailto:[email protected]">mailto:[email protected]]On</a> Behalf Of John Jamison
Sent: Tuesday, June 16, 1998 4:51 PM
To: Venkat Kodumudi
Cc: [email protected]
Subject: Re: Is there a way to have 2 network cards on the samemachine
Venkat,
Technically yes this is possible, though not in Forte. A nameserver
can
only listen on one port.
To implement this scheme you will have to write a proxy service (insome
language
including perhaps forte) which listens on the well-known port on the
second card, reads requests, then forwards them to the realnameservice
(wkp on the first card), and forwards replies back. This is not
trivial, but some firewall toolkit vendors supply stub code to write
application specific proxies.
-J
Venkat Kodumudi wrote:
Folks,
Here is what we would like to do:
We want to have 2 network cards on a unix box - which means I have
2
ip
addresses, and the connection between the two is the unix box and
only
the
unix box. I have a pc connected to the 2nd network card and I want
it
to
connect to the nameserver that is listening on a well known port
on
the
first network card. We don't want to turn IP forwarding between
the
two
cards. We want Forte to address both cards to talk to clients, in
one
environment.
Can this be done? If so how?
Thanks in advance.
Venkat Kodumudi
Price Waterhouse LLP
Internet: [email protected]
Internet2: [email protected]
To unsubscribe, email '[email protected]' with
'unsubscribe forte-users' as the body of the message.
Searchable thread archive<URL:<a href=
"http://pinehurst.sageit.com/listarchive/">http://pinehurst.sageit.com/listarchive/</a>>
>>>>
John Jamison [email protected]
Vice President and Chief Technology Officer
Sage IT Partners, Inc.
Voice: 415 392-7243 x 306
Fax: 415 391-3899
Internet Enabled Business Change
<a href=
"http://www.sageit.com">http://www.sageit.com</a>
To unsubscribe, email '[email protected]' with
'unsubscribe forte-users' as the body of the message.
Searchable thread archive <URL:<a href=
"http://pinehurst.sageit.com/listarchive/">http://pinehurst.sageit.com/listarchive/</a>>

Hello Venkat,
I probably should have mentioned this before. Your are correct. Forte is
doing a host lookup if you are providing a name for example machine1:5000.
You can bypass the host lookup by using the actual ip dot address instead
for example 255.255.255.255:5000. This way you are taking the name service
out od the picture and Forte will use the address provided.
Sean
-----Original Message-----
From: Venkat Kodumudi [mailto:[email protected]]
Sent: Monday, June 22, 1998 9:27 AM
To: 'Sean Brown'
Cc: [email protected]
Subject: RE: Is there a way to have 2 network cards on the same machine
My requirement is that my second card serves as best case performance
testing piece. This eliminates the network completely. We went one step
ahead and created a new enviromnent for the second card. Whatever I do, the
nodemgr is returning back the IP address of the first card, even though my
FORTE_NS_ADDRESS does not have the first card in the picture any where.
I think Forte is doing a host look up and returning the first IP address it
finds, as opposed to returning the IP address specified in the environment
variable FORTE_NS_ADDRESS. Is there a way to trick it?
Venkat Kodumudi
Price Waterhouse LLP
Internet: [email protected]
Internet2: [email protected]
-----Original Message-----
From: Sean Brown [SMTP:[email protected]]
Sent: Thursday, June 18, 1998 9:54 AM
To: Venkat Kodumudi
Cc: [email protected]
Subject: RE: Is there a way to have 2 network cards on the same
machine
OK, you ran into one of the issues. That is, if both addresses are known
to
the client that is trying to contact the partition it will always use the
first address in FORTE_LOCATIONS. This is because FORTE_LOCATIONS was
designed more as a failover mechanism. So it will always try the first
address in the list and if it succeeds, there is no reason to move on to
the
second.
Now, the second issue is that there is currently a problem with the client
failover to the secondary address in FORTE_LOCATIONS. If the first entry
fails it is supposed to retry on the second entry. Instead, it retries
the
first entry again. I know that Forte knows about this but I do not have a
bug number on it.
With that said, lets look at a possible solution for you. If the real
objective here is to have a back up network card available for fail over
on
the same machine, or use one card to advertise outside your firewall and
one
to use inside, then you will have to contact Forte to determine when the
failover problem will be fixed. But, if the objective is to load balance
across the network cards you could have the environment manager listen on
both ports and then alternate your server partitions across both cards.
For
example:
set FORTE_NS_ADDRESS=card1:5000;card2:5000 and then start up the
environment
manager
set FORTE_LOCATIONS=card1:0 (the 0 in the port causes the OS to pick a
port)
and start partition one
set FORTE_LOCATIONS=card2:0 and start partition two
and so on....
In this scenario the environment manager will be listening on both cards
but
each server will be listening on only one of the two cards. So if a
request
comes in for partition1 it will go through card one and if it is for
partition two it will go through card two. You could assign your
partitions
to cards based on expected load.
Well, I am done. I hope this helps!
Sean
-----Original Message-----
From: Venkat Kodumudi [mailto:[email protected]]
Sent: Thursday, June 18, 1998 8:06 AM
To: 'Sean Brown'; 'John Jamison'
Cc: [email protected]; Jose Suriol
Subject: RE: Is there a way to have 2 network cards on the same machine
Sean,
Thanks for your reply. I tried the approach. I was not very specific in
my
question. I do need the ability for server applications to listen and
server
on both the network cards.
I was succesfully able to make the nodemgr listen on both the cards and
actually serve requests coming in from both the cards. But, following your
advise, I took a cautious step with FORTE_LOCATIONS. Here is what I
noticed.
I have an application that has 6 partitions in total. I used
FORTE_LOCATION
to make it listen on 1. Both the cards. 2. Swapped the IP addresses for
both
cards for this application. 3. One card that I want it to listen on. I
tried
all approaches by exporting the locations variable for just this
application. The nodemgr recieves a request from this pc connected on the
second card to talk to one of the partitions. The node mgr responds with a
proxy - with the ip address and socket number of the first card. The
FORTE_NS_ADDRESS variable looks like this:
IP1:5002;IP2:5002.
Is it possible atall to resolve my problem, without having a seperate
environment?
Thanks
Venkat Kodumudi
Price Waterhouse LLP
Internet: [email protected]
Internet2: [email protected]
-----Original Message-----
From: Sean Brown [SMTP:[email protected]]
Sent: Wednesday, June 17, 1998 10:42 AM
To: 'John Jamison'; Venkat Kodumudi
Cc: [email protected]
Subject: RE: Is there a way to have 2 network cards on the same
machine
Venkat,
Actually, it is possible for Forte to listen on more than one IP andport
combination. The first reply to your message was correct. If you setthe
FORTE_NS_ADDRESS to contain multiple entries before starting the name
service, it will advertise on both. For Forte servers you use the
FORTE_LOCATIONS env variable to get it to advertise on multiple ip:port
combinations.
We were doing something very similar with another customer I was at toget
around a firewall. I will warn you that there are some issues with
FORTE_LOCATIONS that may keep that portion from working. However, from
reading your note, it appears that all you need is for the name serviceto
advertise and listen on multiple ports and that works fine. I justtested
it again for sanity sake and it worked. I ran my test on NT using Forte
3G2.
Sean
-----Original Message-----
From: [email protected]
[<a href="mailto:[email protected]">mailto:[email protected]]On</a> Behalf Of John Jamison
Sent: Tuesday, June 16, 1998 4:51 PM
To: Venkat Kodumudi
Cc: [email protected]
Subject: Re: Is there a way to have 2 network cards on the same machine
Venkat,
Technically yes this is possible, though not in Forte. A name server
can
only listen on one port.
To implement this scheme you will have to write a proxy service (in some
language
including perhaps forte) which listens on the well-known port on the
second card, reads requests, then forwards them to the real nameservice
(wkp on the first card), and forwards replies back. This is not
trivial, but some firewall toolkit vendors supply stub code to write
application specific proxies.
-J
Venkat Kodumudi wrote:
Folks,
Here is what we would like to do:
We want to have 2 network cards on a unix box - which means I have 2ip
addresses, and the connection between the two is the unix box and onlythe
unix box. I have a pc connected to the 2nd network card and I want it
to
connect to the nameserver that is listening on a well known port onthe
first network card. We don't want to turn IP forwarding between thetwo
cards. We want Forte to address both cards to talk to clients, in one
environment.
Can this be done? If so how?
Thanks in advance.
Venkat Kodumudi
Price Waterhouse LLP
Internet: [email protected]
Internet2: [email protected]
To unsubscribe, email '[email protected]' with
'unsubscribe forte-users' as the body of the message.
Searchable thread archive<URL:<a href=
"http://pinehurst.sageit.com/listarchive/">http://pinehurst.sageit.com/listarchive/</a>>
>>
John Jamison [email protected]
Vice President and Chief Technology Officer
Sage IT Partners, Inc.
Voice: 415 392-7243 x 306
Fax: 415 391-3899
Internet Enabled Business Change
<a href="http://www.sageit.com">http://www.sageit.com</a>
To unsubscribe, email '[email protected]' with
'unsubscribe forte-users' as the body of the message.
Searchable thread archive <URL:<a href=
"http://pinehurst.sageit.com/listarchive/">http://pinehurst.sageit.com/listarchive/</a>>

ISE 1.2 - Multiple NICs/Load Balancing for DHCP Probe

Hello guys
Just prepping an ISE 1.2 patch 8 setup in our organization. I am going for the virtual appliances with multiple NICs. It will be a distributed deployment with 4 x PSNs behind a load balancer and there is no requirement for wireless or guest user at the moment. I've got 2 points I will like to get some guidance on:
Our DC has a dedicated mgmt network and I plan to IP the gig0 interface of the PANs, MNTs and PSNs from this subnet. All device admin, clustering, config replication, etc will be over this interface. However, RADIUS/probe/other user traffic to the ISE PSNs will be over the gig1 interface which will be addressed from another L3 network. Is this a supported configuration in ISE?
I intend to use the DHCP probe as part of device profiling and will ideally like to have just an additional ip helper to add to our switch SVI config. Also, it will appear that WLCs can only be configured for 2 DHCP servers for a given network so another consideration for when we bringing our WLAN in scope. We however use ACE load balancers within our DC and from what I have read, they do not support DHCP load balancing. Are there any workarounds to using the DHCP probe with multiple PSNs without having to add each node as an ip helper/DHCP server on the NADs?
Thanks in advance
Sayre

Hello Sayre-
For Question #1:
Management is restricted to GigabitEthernet 0 and that cannot be changed so you should be good there
You can configure Radius and Profiling to be enabled on other interfaces
Even though you are not using guest services yet, you can dedicate an interface just for that. As a result, you can separate guest traffic completely from your production network
Take a look at this link for more info:
http://www.cisco.com/c/en/us/td/docs/security/ise/1-2/installation_guide/ise_ig/ise_app_c-ports.html
For Question #2
If you are using a Cisco WLC and running code 7.4 and newer you don't need to mess with the IP helper configurations.
The controller can be configured to act as a collector for client profiling and interact with the DHCP thread along with the RADIUS accounting task that is running on the controller. The controller receives a copy of the DHCP request packet sent from the DHCP thread and parses the DHCP packet for two options:
–Option 12—HostName of the client
–Option 60—The Vendor Class Identifier
After this information is gathered from the DHCP_REQUEST packet, a message is formed by the controller with these option fields and is sent to the RADIUS accounting thread, which is in turn transmitted to the ISE in the form of an interim accounting message.
Both DHCP and HTTP profiling settings are located under the "Advanced" configuration tab in the WLC
On the other hand, you can also use Anycast for profiling. You can check out some of Cisco Live's sessions for more info on that. Here is one that is from a couple of years (There are more recent ones that are available as well):
http://www.alcatron.net/Cisco%20Live%202013%20Melbourne/Cisco%20Live%20Content/Security/BRKSEC-3040%20%20Advanced%20ISE%20and%20Secure%20Access%20Deployment.pdf
I hope this helps!
Thank you for rating helpful posts!

Multiple NICs (network cards)

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for