DHCP client and bonding

RedHat 9, kernel version: 2.4.20.80
I am bonding etc1 and eth2 (machine has 3 NICs). Each NIC gets IP address
via DHCP. Bond0 is configured for 10.0.0.1. DHCP server givesIPs from
192.168.222.0 network.

1. When in the slave mode, neither eth1 nor eth2 gets IP from the DHCP
server (I don't think DHCP request is even send)
2. When interface is NOT in the slave mode, DHCP works fine.
why?
thanks

"LB" <noemail@noemail.com> wrote in message news:<FaqdnTY1A6omIVyi4p2dnA@comcast.com>...
> RedHat 9, kernel version: 2.4.20.80
> I am bonding etc1 and eth2 (machine has 3 NICs). Each NIC gets IP address
> via DHCP. Bond0 is configured for 10.0.0.1. DHCP server givesIPs from
> 192.168.222.0 network.
>
> 1. When in the slave mode, neither eth1 nor eth2 gets IP from the DHCP
> server (I don't think DHCP request is even send)
> 2. When interface is NOT in the slave mode, DHCP works fine.
> why?
> thanks

Either you're a little confused you just answered your own question.

You said bond0 is configured for 10.0.0.1 which means it's not going
to get a dhcp address. From what I understand, when eth1-2 are in bond
mode, they don't each need their own IP address; that would be
redundant.

Just to clear some stuff up, please post the contents of
/etc/sysconfig/network-scripts/ifcfg-bond0 (or something named similar
- I'm not sure how distro-dependent that name is).

-icy

Correct, eth1-2 don't need their own IPs. I was trying to use DHCP to assign
IP to the newly created bond0. Here is the bond file (exactly from
http://www.redhat.com/docs/manuals/e...ERFACES-CHAN):

DEVICE=bond0
BOOTPROTO=none
ONBOOT=yes
NETWORK=10.0.1.0
NETMASK=255.255.255.0
IPADDR=10.0.1.27
USERCTL=noWhen I set BOOTPROTO=dhcp none of the NIC get initialize. Is it by
design?thanks

"icywind" <icywind@m-net.arbornet.org> wrote in message
news:2137c869.0311251941.362b0c1f@posting.google.c om...
> "LB" <noemail@noemail.com> wrote in message
news:<FaqdnTY1A6omIVyi4p2dnA@comcast.com>...
> > RedHat 9, kernel version: 2.4.20.80
> > I am bonding etc1 and eth2 (machine has 3 NICs). Each NIC gets IP
address
> > via DHCP. Bond0 is configured for 10.0.0.1. DHCP server givesIPs from
> > 192.168.222.0 network.
> >
> > 1. When in the slave mode, neither eth1 nor eth2 gets IP from the DHCP
> > server (I don't think DHCP request is even send)
> > 2. When interface is NOT in the slave mode, DHCP works fine.
> > why?
> > thanks
>
> Either you're a little confused you just answered your own question.
>
> You said bond0 is configured for 10.0.0.1 which means it's not going
> to get a dhcp address. From what I understand, when eth1-2 are in bond
> mode, they don't each need their own IP address; that would be
> redundant.
>
> Just to clear some stuff up, please post the contents of
> /etc/sysconfig/network-scripts/ifcfg-bond0 (or something named similar
> - I'm not sure how distro-dependent that name is).
>
> -icy

Also since eth1 and eth2 inherit the SAME address from bond0, how can I
physically plug in eth1 and eth2 to two DIFFERENT sub-nets? The grand
objective is to bond two connections from two ISPs
thanks



"LB" <noemail@noemail.com> wrote in message
news:RO-dncVrIZUo7liiRVn-tA@comcast.com...
Correct, eth1-2 don't need their own IPs. I was trying to use DHCP to
assign
IP to the newly created bond0. Here is the bond file (exactly from

http://www.redhat.com/docs/manuals/e...ERFACES-CHAN):

DEVICE=bond0
BOOTPROTO=none
ONBOOT=yes
NETWORK=10.0.1.0
NETMASK=255.255.255.0
IPADDR=10.0.1.27
USERCTL=noWhen I set BOOTPROTO=dhcp none of the NIC get initialize. Is it
by
design?thanks


> "icywind" <icywind@m-net.arbornet.org> wrote in message
> news:2137c869.0311251941.362b0c1f@posting.google.c om...
> > "LB" <noemail@noemail.com> wrote in message
> news:<FaqdnTY1A6omIVyi4p2dnA@comcast.com>...
> > > RedHat 9, kernel version: 2.4.20.80
> > > I am bonding etc1 and eth2 (machine has 3 NICs). Each NIC gets IP
> address
> > > via DHCP. Bond0 is configured for 10.0.0.1. DHCP server givesIPs from
> > > 192.168.222.0 network.
> > >
> > > 1. When in the slave mode, neither eth1 nor eth2 gets IP from the DHCP
> > > server (I don't think DHCP request is even send)
> > > 2. When interface is NOT in the slave mode, DHCP works fine.
> > > why?
> > > thanks
> >
> > Either you're a little confused you just answered your own question.
> >
> > You said bond0 is configured for 10.0.0.1 which means it's not going
> > to get a dhcp address. From what I understand, when eth1-2 are in bond
> > mode, they don't each need their own IP address; that would be
> > redundant.
> >
> > Just to clear some stuff up, please post the contents of
> > /etc/sysconfig/network-scripts/ifcfg-bond0 (or something named similar
> > - I'm not sure how distro-dependent that name is).
> >
> > -icy
>
>

"LB" <noemail@noemail.com> wrote in message news:<N-SdnUbUF9OF5FiiRVn-iQ@comcast.com>...
> Also since eth1 and eth2 inherit the SAME address from bond0, how can I
> physically plug in eth1 and eth2 to two DIFFERENT sub-nets? The grand
> objective is to bond two connections from two ISPs
> thanks
>
>
>
> "LB" <noemail@noemail.com> wrote in message
> news:RO-dncVrIZUo7liiRVn-tA@comcast.com...
> Correct, eth1-2 don't need their own IPs. I was trying to use DHCP to
> assign
> IP to the newly created bond0. Here is the bond file (exactly from
>
> http://www.redhat.com/docs/manuals/e...ERFACES-CHAN):
>
> DEVICE=bond0
> BOOTPROTO=none
> ONBOOT=yes
> NETWORK=10.0.1.0
> NETMASK=255.255.255.0
> IPADDR=10.0.1.27
> USERCTL=noWhen I set BOOTPROTO=dhcp none of the NIC get initialize. Is it
> by
> design?thanks
>
>
> > "icywind" <icywind@m-net.arbornet.org> wrote in message
> > news:2137c869.0311251941.362b0c1f@posting.google.c om...
> > > "LB" <noemail@noemail.com> wrote in message
> news:<FaqdnTY1A6omIVyi4p2dnA@comcast.com>...
> > > > RedHat 9, kernel version: 2.4.20.80
> > > > I am bonding etc1 and eth2 (machine has 3 NICs). Each NIC gets IP
> address
> > > > via DHCP. Bond0 is configured for 10.0.0.1. DHCP server givesIPs from
> > > > 192.168.222.0 network.
> > > >
> > > > 1. When in the slave mode, neither eth1 nor eth2 gets IP from the DHCP
> > > > server (I don't think DHCP request is even send)
> > > > 2. When interface is NOT in the slave mode, DHCP works fine.
> > > > why?
> > > > thanks
> > >
> > > Either you're a little confused you just answered your own question.
> > >
> > > You said bond0 is configured for 10.0.0.1 which means it's not going
> > > to get a dhcp address. From what I understand, when eth1-2 are in bond
> > > mode, they don't each need their own IP address; that would be
> > > redundant.
> > >
> > > Just to clear some stuff up, please post the contents of
> > > /etc/sysconfig/network-scripts/ifcfg-bond0 (or something named similar
> > > - I'm not sure how distro-dependent that name is).
> > >
> > > -icy
> >
> >

You misunderstand the purpose of ethernet bonding. The idea is not to
bond two connections to two different places, but rather to bond two
connections to the same place, thus creating a single interface that
has twice as much bandwidth.

When eth1-2 are in bonded mode, their configurations are ignored and
bond0's configuration alone is used.

As listed, the configuration file of bond0 doesn't use dhcp at all. If
you do actually want to use a bonded ethernet connection (which
doesn't solve your problem, by the way) you would modify bond0's
configuration file to say this:
DEVICE="bond0"
BOOTPROTO="dhcp"
ONBOOT="yes"
NETWORK=""
NETMASK=""
IPADDR=""
USERCTL="no"

I'd say you're going down the wrong path to achieve what you want.
Ethernet bonding is an experimental feature only really intended for
serious network hackers.

-icy