From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (firstgate.proxmox.com [212.224.123.68]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by lists.proxmox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 73CFF61688 for ; Mon, 14 Sep 2020 09:16:06 +0200 (CEST) Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 695C3DBD4 for ; Mon, 14 Sep 2020 09:15:36 +0200 (CEST) Received: from proxmox-new.maurer-it.com (proxmox-new.maurer-it.com [212.186.127.180]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTPS id 063C1DBC7 for ; Mon, 14 Sep 2020 09:15:36 +0200 (CEST) Received: from proxmox-new.maurer-it.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by proxmox-new.maurer-it.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id BFE3844B98; Mon, 14 Sep 2020 09:15:35 +0200 (CEST) Date: Mon, 14 Sep 2020 09:14:50 +0200 (CEST) From: Dietmar Maurer To: Proxmox VE development discussion , Alexandre DERUMIER , Thomas Lamprecht Message-ID: <803983196.1499.1600067690947@webmail.proxmox.com> In-Reply-To: <1928266603.714059.1600059280338.JavaMail.zimbra@odiso.com> References: <216436814.339545.1599142316781.JavaMail.zimbra@odiso.com> <1551800621.910.1599540071310@webmail.proxmox.com> <1680829869.439013.1599549082330.JavaMail.zimbra@odiso.com> <761694744.496919.1599713892772.JavaMail.zimbra@odiso.com> <3ee5d9cf-19be-1067-3931-1c54f1c6043a@proxmox.com> <1245358354.508169.1599737684557.JavaMail.zimbra@odiso.com> <9e2974b8-3c39-0fda-6f73-6677e3d796f4@proxmox.com> <1928266603.714059.1600059280338.JavaMail.zimbra@odiso.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 Importance: Normal X-Mailer: Open-Xchange Mailer v7.10.3-Rev21 X-Originating-Client: open-xchange-appsuite X-SPAM-LEVEL: Spam detection results: 0 AWL 0.082 Adjusted score from AWL reputation of From: address KAM_DMARC_STATUS 0.01 Test Rule for DKIM or SPF Failure with Strict Alignment RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED -2.3 Sender listed at https://www.dnswl.org/, medium trust SPF_HELO_NONE 0.001 SPF: HELO does not publish an SPF Record SPF_PASS -0.001 SPF: sender matches SPF record Subject: Re: [pve-devel] corosync bug: cluster break after 1 node clean shutdown X-BeenThere: pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Proxmox VE development discussion List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 14 Sep 2020 07:16:06 -0000 > I wonder if something like pacemaker sbd could be implemented in proxmox as extra layer of protection ? AFAIK Thomas already has patches to implement active fencing. But IMHO this will not solve the corosync problems..