toasters

toasters@lists.teaparty.net

13520 discussions

Re: F740 at home -- please help me!
by Alan.McLachlan＠didata.com.au 08 Nov '04

08 Nov '04

Edward, You completely misunderstood my post. I was suggesting that your recommended solution (the PCI raid + new drives) was the "more appropriate low-cost alternative" My objection was to your statement that the PC +RAID was a "better" NFS+Samba server than a NetApp, which is clearly not the case. Read it again. regards, Alan McLachlan ___________________________________ Solution Architect - Data Centre Solutions Dimension Data Australia Alan.McLachlan(a)didata.com.au Tel. +61 (0)2 61225123 Fax +61 (0)2 62486346 Mobile 0428 655644 ----- Forwarded by Alan McLachlan on 09/11/2004 09:20 AM ----- Edward Valencia <edjv(a)corp.earthlink.net> 09/11/2004 05:31 AM To: Alan.McLachlan(a)didata.com.au cc: Subject: Re: F740 at home -- please help me! Alan.McLachlan(a)didata.com.au wrote: > > Hi Edward, > > > "Get 7 200gb drives a pci raid controller and a decent pc and > you have a better nfs/samba server than both those two machines > combined." > > You have to be kidding. Even an F720 will kill a current PC running > Windows or Linux as far as wide-sharing I/O is concerned, not to mention > data protection (NTFS, ext3 and Reiser are all traditional > update-in-place filesystems, nowhere near as robust as WAFL. It would be > better to say "...you have a more appropriate machine for low-cost home > use". > Wrong words used in part, but a netapp is not a low cost alternative to the average user as you stated. Im not trying to start a flame war here, just telling the guy that not to expect much from service and support if he is interested in keeping vital data on these machines when support is extremely expensive. Using these older machines to learn and to get more expirience is always a plus for anyone. > "... worthless for home usage" is also a little strong. Certainly a > NetApp is _overkill_ for most home use, but it's certainly not worthless. > > I do know one person who keeps an old F760 at home to support his six > machine Linux render farm (he's into video production at home). He's > tried what you suggested (new PC with hardware RAID) and it simply can't > keep up. This is the exception and its very rare that an average home user would use this type of equipment for anything more that keeping large amounts of video/audio. > > Technically most "home users" keeping old NetApp boxes are not actually > doing anything illegal, as the licences are bound to the machine's > serial number and are perpetual. Never said that there was anything illegal about having the equipment, other than the support/service is all tied to the serial number on the head. The only catch is that legally they are > restricted to the last version of OnTap that was available for download > before the software subscription for that machine expired. (No, I don't > want to spark that old debate again - just read your licence agreement > for your old filers. I believe this did change with the 9xx series). > > The only issue for them is having to do their own support - as you say, > you wouldn't pay NetApp's commercial support fees for home use...! > > > -------------------------------------------------- > > Adam, you will probably find that your 740 is completely unsupported by > NetApp, you might want to try to find a friendly reseller who has an old > version of OnTap appropriate for your machine with the boot floppies. To > be legal you would need to trace back to the previous owner, find out > when their software subscription expired and find the last version of > OnTap available before the expiry. Too hard really. My guess is that > NetApp would not bother to prosecute a home user for running a more > recent copy of OnTap. It's a little too grey legally and not worth their > effort. On the other hand, if you use it for any commercial purpose > that's a whole different scenario and you would want to make sure you > are licenced, even if you don't care about the support. > > Edward's comment about the drive failure rate is absolutely right - for > commercial use. For your home use you would expect the drives won't be > anywhere near as stressed and they will last much longer. You would be > wise however to take advantage of the on-the-fly expansion and leave as > many disks as possible as hot spares until you need them. That way you > will have a large pool of spares that will decrease only as you add them > to a volume or fail them out of the array. > > Good Luck! > > regards, > > Alan McLachla > ___________________________________ > Solution Architect - Data Centre Solutions > Dimension Data Australia > Alan.McLachlan(a)didata.com.au > Tel. +61 (0)2 61225123 > Fax +61 (0)2 62486346 > Mobile 0428 655644 > > ----- Forwarded by Alan McLachlan on 08/11/2004 10:17 AM ----- > *Edward Valencia <edjv(a)corp.earthlink.net>* > Sent by: owner-toasters(a)mathworks.com > > 08/11/2004 07:24 AM > > > To: mikka makka <mikkamakka(a)hotmail.com> > cc: toasters(a)mathworks.com > Subject: Re: F740 at home -- please help me! > > > > > You must like to waste electricity this is a wrothless product to have > at home. Get 7 200gb drives a pci raid controller and a decent pc and > you have a better nfs/samba server than both those two machines > combined. Also the rate that the disk failures occur on such old systems > you will need alot of spares, the cost isnt worth it. Sell it on ebay or > something and use the money to build the system described. > > To be able to download the software for your netapps, you will need to > register the heads and then see if they have the software entitlement > enabled. As I said these systems are worthless for home usage. Since > netapp makes thier money on supporting the harwdware, than the hardware > itself. The cost to enable parts replacements on 13 F760s for us was > 135k a year. Ten thousand a year for next day support and a nfs license. > Tells you alot. > > > Edwardv- > > mikka makka wrote: > > > Hi all> > > Last year I inherited an F740 filer with two FC9 shelves (7x36 GB > > disks). I used it happily at home for a few months and then a disk > > began to fail -- one had already failed, so that put the unit out of > > commission although luckily I was able to get all my data off it before > > total lossage. I bought a couple of Seagate ST136403FC drives -- the > > same model number as in the drive carriers -- off ebay and tried > > swapping them in, but no luck; the system wouldn't recognize them. On a > > hunch that it might have to do with firmware I tried swapping the > > drive's controller boards (old drives' controllers with new drives), but > > that didn't work either; the system wouldn't come up, dumping core for > > some reason. I figured the drives themselves probably needed to be > > zeroed/initialized/labeled in some way that made them acceptable to the > > Netapp, but I couldn't figure out any way to get the Netapp up and into > > a mode that would let me do that. Finally, lacking documentation for > > the system, I gave up. > > > > Fast-forward a little, I just inherited a second filer, an F720, also > > with two FC9 (7x36) shelves. As far as I know all disks good. > > Unfortunately it won't boot up (it finds and loads the image, gives the > > "Initializing PCI devices" and then suddenly reboots itself, without > > even dumping core). I'm not sure what the problem could be. > > > > I tried plugging in some of the disks from the new shelves in place of > > the bad disks in the old one, and now the 740 starts up and gives me a > > "File system may be scrambled" message -- well, of course it is, since > > the replaced disks contain who-knows-what, but I don't see how I can > > proceed from there. I'm not worried about getting back the original > > file system as I backed it up -- I just want to clear everything out and > > make a new one. > > > > The situation seems to me to be this: I've got an F740 (and a spare > > F720), and four shelves with a grand total of 26 good, identical, disks > > (and maybe even 28, if I could get the drive controller swap to work). > > That's 900GB of storage. > > > > I'm sure I should be able somehow to hook the four shelves up to the > > 740, reinitialize the whole system and all the drives somehow, and start > > afresh with a working 900GB filesystem. But I don't have the docs and > > floppy or whatever that came with the filers and I have no idea how to > > proceed given that the filer won't even start up to give me a command > > prompt that I might be able to work with. I'm not sure if I would need > > to boot from a floppy (I don't have one) or what... > > > > Is there anyone out there who could help, in any way? I'd be forever > > grateful... For the few months I had the 740 running, it was heaven -- > > amazing having a file server like this at home, even though I was using > > only the smallest fraction of its capabilities. Now that I have four > > disk shelves, I'm really motivated to get it working again, but I'm > > truly stuck without documentation > > > > Thanks so much for any help you could offer, > > Adam Jacobs > > mikkamakka(a)hotmail.com > > > > . > > > > _________________________________________________________________ > > Express yourself instantly with MSN Messenger! Download today it's FREE! > > http://messenger.msn.com/ > > > > > > > ****************************************************************************** > - NOTICE FROM DIMENSION DATA AUSTRALIA > This message is confidential, and may contain proprietary or legally > privileged information. If you have received this email in error, please > notify the sender and delete it immediately. > > Internet communications are not secure. You should scan this message and > any attachments for viruses. Under no circumstances do we accept > liability for any loss or damage which may result from your receipt of > this message or any attachments. > ******************************************************************************

1 0

RE: snaprestore reboots the filer?
by Debbie.Lane＠intermec.com 08 Nov '04

08 Nov '04

We have used snaprestore on non-root volumes, and the filer did not reboot. --Debbie -----Original Message----- From: owner-toasters(a)mathworks.com [mailto:owner-toasters@mathworks.com] On Behalf Of Robert Borowicz Sent: Monday, November 08, 2004 10:20 AM To: Netapp Subject: snaprestore reboots the filer? The following was lifted from the following doc url: http://www.netapp.com/tech_library/3130.html#5 <http://www.netapp.com/tech_library/3130.html#5> . My "Data Protection Guide" says only if you snap restore the root volume will the filer will reboot which makes sense to me. The following is from Section 5.1 of the above referenced doc. I think this is an error in the doc. Can anybody confirm this for me? Thanks -Bob B. *************************excerpt from URL doc******************************** Next, from the filer's console or a telnet connection, issue the following command: vol snaprestore voldb -s new A reboot of the filer will occur. After the filer has rebooted, you can start the database back up again: "This message is intended only for the named recipient. If you are not the intended recipient you are notified that disclosing, copying, distributing or taking any action in reliance on the contents of this information is strictly prohibited."

2 1

Re: FW: VSCAN errors
by Florian Pfaff 08 Nov '04

08 Nov '04

Hello Thorsten, is it possible that there is a local scanner running on the server? If there is a local virus scanner running on the server, it will scan and lock the files copied from the filer-scanner. So the file will be locked for the filer-scanengine. A possible solution may be to exclude the filer-scanengine and its temp directories from scanning. Greetings Florian Thorsten.Lemke(a)computacenter.com schrieb am 05.11.04 11:19:54: > > > > We have the same error messages but with Symantec software. Perhaps we are > able to solve that in a similar way. > > But we have also another more serious problem: > > Sun Oct 24 08:53:17 CEST [nvgm001@ngm001: vscan.virus.detected:error]: > CIFS: Virus Detected - File > ONTAP_ADMIN$\vol\vgm001\qgm00002\User_f\Q07xx\Heimarbeitsplatz\pers\Allgemein\Portfoliorunde > 2002\Muster für die Dateneingabe am PC.ppt in share Q07XX accessed by > client XXX (xxx.xxx.xxx.xx) running as user q07XX is infected. The filer > received status message Internal server error and error code [5] from vscan > (anti-virus) server xxx.xxx.xxx.xx. > > All the files that are logged in this way are corrupted and not accessible > any more. We dont know yet if they were corrupted before or if the scanner > software messes them up but the amount is growing and growing... > Has anyone ever encountered problems like this with Symantec Scan Engine or > other scanner software? > > > Regards > > Thorsten Lemke > > > > > > > SKIP HOFMANN <SKIP.HOFMANN(a)ttisg.com>@mathworks.com on 04.11.2004 20:12:10 > > Sent by: owner-toasters(a)mathworks.com > > > To: toasters(a)mathworks.com > cc: > Subject: FW: VSCAN errors > > -------------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > > > Found the answer on Trends support site ID # 11930 and 10573. Looks like > its not a big deal > > > > > > > From:SKIP HOFMANN > Sent: Thursday, November 04, 2004 10:37 AM > To: toasters(a)mathworks.com > Subject: VSCAN errors > > > > Hello all I keep getting these errors on my FAS250. Is this a Trend issue > or a filer problem? > > > > Thu Nov 4 10:28:00 PST [rpc_0:warning]: CIFS: Virus scanner 10.20.0.58 > completed scan on ONTAP_ADMIN$\vol\vol0\data\mfg\JOBS\110088\Impermeable > Barriers\CD\Reader\JavaScripts\aform.js but original request was not found. > > Thu Nov 4 10:28:06 PST [CIFSVScan:warning]: CIFS: Virus scan request to > 10.20.0.58 timed out. > > > > > > Skip Hofmann > > Senior Network Administrator > > TetraTech > > Skip.Hofmann(a)ttisg.com > > 949 500 5286 cell > > 949 608 5801 office > > > > > > > > > COMPUTACENTER (UK) LTD > > The contents of this e-mail are intended for the named addressee only. > It contains information which may be confidential and which may also be privileged. > Unless you are the named addressee (or authorised to receive > for the addressee) you may not copy or use it, or disclose it to anyone > else. If you received it in error please notify us immediately and then > destroy it. > > Computacenter information is available from http://www.computacenter.com > > This footnote also confirms that this email message has been swept for the presence of computer viruses. > > *************************************************************************************************************************** >

1 0

snaprestore reboots the filer?
by Robert Borowicz 08 Nov '04

08 Nov '04

The following was lifted from the following doc url: http://www.netapp.com/tech_library/3130.html#5. My "Data Protection Guide" says only if you snap restore the root volume will the filer will reboot which makes sense to me. The following is from Section 5.1 of the above referenced doc. I think this is an error in the doc. Can anybody confirm this for me? Thanks -Bob B. *************************excerpt from URL doc******************************** Next, from the filer's console or a telnet connection, issue the following command: vol snaprestore voldb -s new A reboot of the filer will occur. After the filer has rebooted, you can start the database back up again:

1 0

Backup device?
by Frank Bonnet 08 Nov '04

08 Nov '04

Hello I am searching to replace our HP dlt8000 ( 9 slots ) to a new backup device, the filer is a F87 with 250 Gb online. The goal is to perform nightly incremental backups of user's data. I need infos on the most appropriate device to do that job. Thanks a lot. -- Regards/Cordialement Frank Bonnet

3 2

Re: F740 at home -- please help me!
by Alan.McLachlan＠didata.com.au 07 Nov '04

07 Nov '04

Hi Edward, "Get 7 200gb drives a pci raid controller and a decent pc and you have a better nfs/samba server than both those two machines combined." You have to be kidding. Even an F720 will kill a current PC running Windows or Linux as far as wide-sharing I/O is concerned, not to mention data protection (NTFS, ext3 and Reiser are all traditional update-in-place filesystems, nowhere near as robust as WAFL. It would be better to say "...you have a more appropriate machine for low-cost home use". "... worthless for home usage" is also a little strong. Certainly a NetApp is _overkill_ for most home use, but it's certainly not worthless. I do know one person who keeps an old F760 at home to support his six machine Linux render farm (he's into video production at home). He's tried what you suggested (new PC with hardware RAID) and it simply can't keep up. Technically most "home users" keeping old NetApp boxes are not actually doing anything illegal, as the licences are bound to the machine's serial number and are perpetual. The only catch is that legally they are restricted to the last version of OnTap that was available for download before the software subscription for that machine expired. (No, I don't want to spark that old debate again - just read your licence agreement for your old filers. I believe this did change with the 9xx series). The only issue for them is having to do their own support - as you say, you wouldn't pay NetApp's commercial support fees for home use...! -------------------------------------------------- Adam, you will probably find that your 740 is completely unsupported by NetApp, you might want to try to find a friendly reseller who has an old version of OnTap appropriate for your machine with the boot floppies. To be legal you would need to trace back to the previous owner, find out when their software subscription expired and find the last version of OnTap available before the expiry. Too hard really. My guess is that NetApp would not bother to prosecute a home user for running a more recent copy of OnTap. It's a little too grey legally and not worth their effort. On the other hand, if you use it for any commercial purpose that's a whole different scenario and you would want to make sure you are licenced, even if you don't care about the support. Edward's comment about the drive failure rate is absolutely right - for commercial use. For your home use you would expect the drives won't be anywhere near as stressed and they will last much longer. You would be wise however to take advantage of the on-the-fly expansion and leave as many disks as possible as hot spares until you need them. That way you will have a large pool of spares that will decrease only as you add them to a volume or fail them out of the array. Good Luck! regards, Alan McLachla ___________________________________ Solution Architect - Data Centre Solutions Dimension Data Australia Alan.McLachlan(a)didata.com.au Tel. +61 (0)2 61225123 Fax +61 (0)2 62486346 Mobile 0428 655644 ----- Forwarded by Alan McLachlan on 08/11/2004 10:17 AM ----- Edward Valencia <edjv(a)corp.earthlink.net> Sent by: owner-toasters(a)mathworks.com 08/11/2004 07:24 AM To: mikka makka <mikkamakka(a)hotmail.com> cc: toasters(a)mathworks.com Subject: Re: F740 at home -- please help me! You must like to waste electricity this is a wrothless product to have at home. Get 7 200gb drives a pci raid controller and a decent pc and you have a better nfs/samba server than both those two machines combined. Also the rate that the disk failures occur on such old systems you will need alot of spares, the cost isnt worth it. Sell it on ebay or something and use the money to build the system described. To be able to download the software for your netapps, you will need to register the heads and then see if they have the software entitlement enabled. As I said these systems are worthless for home usage. Since netapp makes thier money on supporting the harwdware, than the hardware itself. The cost to enable parts replacements on 13 F760s for us was 135k a year. Ten thousand a year for next day support and a nfs license. Tells you alot. Edwardv- mikka makka wrote: > Hi all> > Last year I inherited an F740 filer with two FC9 shelves (7x36 GB > disks). I used it happily at home for a few months and then a disk > began to fail -- one had already failed, so that put the unit out of > commission although luckily I was able to get all my data off it before > total lossage. I bought a couple of Seagate ST136403FC drives -- the > same model number as in the drive carriers -- off ebay and tried > swapping them in, but no luck; the system wouldn't recognize them. On a > hunch that it might have to do with firmware I tried swapping the > drive's controller boards (old drives' controllers with new drives), but > that didn't work either; the system wouldn't come up, dumping core for > some reason. I figured the drives themselves probably needed to be > zeroed/initialized/labeled in some way that made them acceptable to the > Netapp, but I couldn't figure out any way to get the Netapp up and into > a mode that would let me do that. Finally, lacking documentation for > the system, I gave up. > > Fast-forward a little, I just inherited a second filer, an F720, also > with two FC9 (7x36) shelves. As far as I know all disks good. > Unfortunately it won't boot up (it finds and loads the image, gives the > "Initializing PCI devices" and then suddenly reboots itself, without > even dumping core). I'm not sure what the problem could be. > > I tried plugging in some of the disks from the new shelves in place of > the bad disks in the old one, and now the 740 starts up and gives me a > "File system may be scrambled" message -- well, of course it is, since > the replaced disks contain who-knows-what, but I don't see how I can > proceed from there. I'm not worried about getting back the original > file system as I backed it up -- I just want to clear everything out and > make a new one. > > The situation seems to me to be this: I've got an F740 (and a spare > F720), and four shelves with a grand total of 26 good, identical, disks > (and maybe even 28, if I could get the drive controller swap to work). > That's 900GB of storage. > > I'm sure I should be able somehow to hook the four shelves up to the > 740, reinitialize the whole system and all the drives somehow, and start > afresh with a working 900GB filesystem. But I don't have the docs and > floppy or whatever that came with the filers and I have no idea how to > proceed given that the filer won't even start up to give me a command > prompt that I might be able to work with. I'm not sure if I would need > to boot from a floppy (I don't have one) or what... > > Is there anyone out there who could help, in any way? I'd be forever > grateful... For the few months I had the 740 running, it was heaven -- > amazing having a file server like this at home, even though I was using > only the smallest fraction of its capabilities. Now that I have four > disk shelves, I'm really motivated to get it working again, but I'm > truly stuck without documentation > > Thanks so much for any help you could offer, > Adam Jacobs > mikkamakka(a)hotmail.com > > . > > _________________________________________________________________ > Express yourself instantly with MSN Messenger! Download today it's FREE! > http://messenger.msn.com/ > ****************************************************************************** - NOTICE FROM DIMENSION DATA AUSTRALIA This message is confidential, and may contain proprietary or legally privileged information. If you have received this email in error, please notify the sender and delete it immediately. Internet communications are not secure. You should scan this message and any attachments for viruses. Under no circumstances do we accept liability for any loss or damage which may result from your receipt of this message or any attachments. ******************************************************************************

1 0

F740 at home -- please help me!
by mikka makka 07 Nov '04

07 Nov '04

Hi all, Last year I inherited an F740 filer with two FC9 shelves (7x36 GB disks). I used it happily at home for a few months and then a disk began to fail -- one had already failed, so that put the unit out of commission although luckily I was able to get all my data off it before total lossage. I bought a couple of Seagate ST136403FC drives -- the same model number as in the drive carriers -- off ebay and tried swapping them in, but no luck; the system wouldn't recognize them. On a hunch that it might have to do with firmware I tried swapping the drive's controller boards (old drives' controllers with new drives), but that didn't work either; the system wouldn't come up, dumping core for some reason. I figured the drives themselves probably needed to be zeroed/initialized/labeled in some way that made them acceptable to the Netapp, but I couldn't figure out any way to get the Netapp up and into a mode that would let me do that. Finally, lacking documentation for the system, I gave up. Fast-forward a little, I just inherited a second filer, an F720, also with two FC9 (7x36) shelves. As far as I know all disks good. Unfortunately it won't boot up (it finds and loads the image, gives the "Initializing PCI devices" and then suddenly reboots itself, without even dumping core). I'm not sure what the problem could be. I tried plugging in some of the disks from the new shelves in place of the bad disks in the old one, and now the 740 starts up and gives me a "File system may be scrambled" message -- well, of course it is, since the replaced disks contain who-knows-what, but I don't see how I can proceed from there. I'm not worried about getting back the original file system as I backed it up -- I just want to clear everything out and make a new one. The situation seems to me to be this: I've got an F740 (and a spare F720), and four shelves with a grand total of 26 good, identical, disks (and maybe even 28, if I could get the drive controller swap to work). That's 900GB of storage. I'm sure I should be able somehow to hook the four shelves up to the 740, reinitialize the whole system and all the drives somehow, and start afresh with a working 900GB filesystem. But I don't have the docs and floppy or whatever that came with the filers and I have no idea how to proceed given that the filer won't even start up to give me a command prompt that I might be able to work with. I'm not sure if I would need to boot from a floppy (I don't have one) or what... Is there anyone out there who could help, in any way? I'd be forever grateful... For the few months I had the 740 running, it was heaven -- amazing having a file server like this at home, even though I was using only the smallest fraction of its capabilities. Now that I have four disk shelves, I'm really motivated to get it working again, but I'm truly stuck without documentation Thanks so much for any help you could offer, Adam Jacobs mikkamakka(a)hotmail.com . _________________________________________________________________ Express yourself instantly with MSN Messenger! Download today it's FREE! http://messenger.msn.com/

2 1

FW: VSCAN errors
by SKIP HOFMANN 05 Nov '04

05 Nov '04

Found the answer on Trends support site ID # 11930 and 10573. Looks like its not a big deal _____ From: SKIP HOFMANN Sent: Thursday, November 04, 2004 10:37 AM To: toasters(a)mathworks.com Subject: VSCAN errors Hello all I keep getting these errors on my FAS250. Is this a Trend issue or a filer problem? Thu Nov 4 10:28:00 PST [rpc_0:warning]: CIFS: Virus scanner 10.20.0.58 completed scan on ONTAP_ADMIN$\vol\vol0\data\mfg\JOBS\110088\Impermeable Barriers\CD\Reader\JavaScripts\aform.js but original request was not found. Thu Nov 4 10:28:06 PST [CIFSVScan:warning]: CIFS: Virus scan request to 10.20.0.58 timed out. Skip Hofmann Senior Network Administrator TetraTech Skip.Hofmann(a)ttisg.com <mailto:Skip.Hofmann@ttisg.com> 949 500 5286 cell 949 608 5801 office

3 2

re: Routing question
by ferdberfl＠netzero.net 05 Nov '04

05 Nov '04

filers don't have any capability to route data between interfaces. There's nothing you need to do to make sure they filer isn't doing any routing. AFIK it is a common use of filers in mixed high security/non secure environments to share common data through filer interfaces connected to both networks. Note, you will need routing entries to provide paths to networks behind the 2nd interface to the private network. The filer can only point to one gateway for (a 0.0.0.0 entry in the routing table). All other paths off of connected networks have to be pathed via static route table entries. -----Original Message----- From: Matt Phelps [mailto:mphelps@cfa.harvard.edu] Sent: Thursday, November 04, 2004 6:30 AM To: toasters(a)mathworks.com Subject: Routing question Hi all, I want to add a second nework interface (actually a vif, but it shouldn't make any difference) and attach it to a private network on a beowulf cluster; but I want to also keep the current interface to our public network up. How do I make sure the filer isn't doing any routing? Currently, the vif setup for our public network looks like this (IP addresses removed to protect the innocent): hostname foo vif create multi vif0 e9a e9b ifconfig vif0 `hostname`-vif0 netmask 255.255.248.0 route add default xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx routed on So do I just add a foo-cluster (and foo-cluster-vif1) entry to the hosts file with the appropriate private IP address (e.g. 10.1.200.1) and then do: vif create multi vif1 e11a e11b ifconfig vif1 foo-cluster-vif1 netmask 255.0.0.0 Do I need another "route add" for 10.1.1.1 (the gateway to the private network?). I don't understand this stuff. -- Matt Phelps System Administrator, Computation Facility Harvard - Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics mphelps(a)cfa.harvard.edu, http://cfa-www.harvard.edu

2 1

VSCAN errors
by SKIP HOFMANN 04 Nov '04

04 Nov '04

Hello all I keep getting these errors on my FAS250. Is this a Trend issue or a filer problem? Thu Nov 4 10:28:00 PST [rpc_0:warning]: CIFS: Virus scanner 10.20.0.58 completed scan on ONTAP_ADMIN$\vol\vol0\data\mfg\JOBS\110088\Impermeable Barriers\CD\Reader\JavaScripts\aform.js but original request was not found. Thu Nov 4 10:28:06 PST [CIFSVScan:warning]: CIFS: Virus scan request to 10.20.0.58 timed out. Skip Hofmann Senior Network Administrator TetraTech Skip.Hofmann(a)ttisg.com <mailto:Skip.Hofmann@ttisg.com> 949 500 5286 cell 949 608 5801 office

1 0

Jump to page:

2025

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

2007

2006

2005

2004

2003

2002

2001

2000

1999

1998

1997

toasters