Unsolved
This post is more than 5 years old
72 Posts
0
966
cannot backup Hyper-V server in DMZ
I have a problem with hyper-v backup in a DMZ. Client is NMM 2.3-build87, NW 7.6.2.5, 64 bit, W2k8R2.
HV server is in the DMZ. It is multi homed. One net is dedicated to backups. I cannot confine the HV server
to the backup net. I always falls over to the production net which is not accessible from the backup server.
NMM seems to use the native hostname of the HV server for backups. It seems to use backup and
production net for communication with the backup server.
An older HV version with NMM 2.2.1 in the DMZ works seamless.
I configured the HV server with the name in the DMZ net. But I always get errors like:
'Please make sure you have configured at least one NetWorker Device...
This looks like a naming conflict. But name resolution is ok.
Any idea or suggestions?
regards
Bernd
nmc2
268 Posts
0
April 9th, 2012 19:00
Error Looks more related to hostname resolution.
Make sure production ip resolves to production name and backup ip resolves to backup network name.
On client and server machine, try updating the host file with the ipaddress, short name and full name of both Production and Backup NIC. Put the backup NIC ip and name above production ip in the hosts file.
Also make sure that there is not a clientid issue (multiple client instances in short and long names) and no nested indexes.
If everything is set right, verify if you find any other error message in nmm.raw (program files\legato\nsr\applogs\nmm.raw).
Regards,
Prajith
CarlosRojas
1.7K Posts
0
April 9th, 2012 23:00
Hi Bernd,
This sounds familiar to me
I would suggest to:
1.- Get rid of any entry related to that client
2.- Clean out the Media DB (EMC support could do that for you)
3.- Create a new client entry for the Hyper-V server using the name of the dedicated backup network.
4.- Include ALL possible aliases, including those for the production network.
This should work fine, but only if name resolution works fine for all the aliases.
If I remember well, there was some issue with the name resolution such as one IP resolving name for a different machine, but maybe I'm confusing cases here.
Thank you.
Carlos.