|
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] Re: [Xen-users] Yet another question about multiple NICs
Le dimanche 19 dÃcembre 2010 Ã 16:16 +0100, Philippe Combes a Ãcrit :
> Hello Simon,
>
> Thanks for your help.
>
> Simon Hobson wrote :
> > I think the next thing I'd be doing is firing up wireshark (or rather
> > it's text-only brother tshark).
> >
> > On Dom0, get the network working and ping another machine on the lan.
> > Fire up tshark on peth<n> and watch the traffic - you should see both
> > the ping request and reply.
> > Fire up a DomU, and do the same ping - which I gather doesn't work. Keep
> > the ping going from Dom0.
> > Keep watching the packet trace in Dom0 - of interest here are things like :
>
> I am afraid we are about to reach the (short) limits of my competences
> in networking. I tried nevertheless, and looking at the trace below, I
> think I can answer your questions, if I really executed what you meant.
>
> > Did DomU send an ARP request for the remote device ?
> Yes.
>
> > Did the remote device reply ?
> > Are the ping requests going out ?
> > Are the replies coming back ? To the right MAC ?
> No, No, No.
>
> $ ping 192.168.24.125 & tshark -i peth1
> [1] 21099
> PING 192.168.24.125 (192.168.24.125) 56(84) bytes of data.
> Running as user "root" and group "root". This could be dangerous.
> Capturing on peth1
> 0.000000 SunMicro_40:ca:75 -> Broadcast ARP Who has
> 192.168.24.125? Tell 192.168.24.123
> 64 bytes from 192.168.24.125: icmp_seq=1 ttl=64 time=2004 ms
> 64 bytes from 192.168.24.125: icmp_seq=2 ttl=64 time=1004 ms
> 64 bytes from 192.168.24.125: icmp_seq=3 ttl=64 time=4.48 ms
> 1.000061 SunMicro_40:ca:75 -> Broadcast ARP Who has
> 192.168.24.125? Tell 192.168.24.123
> 1.000280 QuantaCo_e0:81:2c -> SunMicro_40:ca:75 ARP 192.168.24.125
> is at 00:16:36:e0:81:2c
> 1.000293 192.168.24.123 -> 192.168.24.125 ICMP Echo (ping) request
> 1.000296 192.168.24.123 -> 192.168.24.125 ICMP Echo (ping) request
> 1.000299 192.168.24.123 -> 192.168.24.125 ICMP Echo (ping) request
> 1.000522 192.168.24.125 -> 192.168.24.123 ICMP Echo (ping) reply
> 1.000541 192.168.24.125 -> 192.168.24.123 ICMP Echo (ping) reply
> 1.000545 192.168.24.125 -> 192.168.24.123 ICMP Echo (ping) reply
> 64 bytes from 192.168.24.125: icmp_seq=4 ttl=64 time=0.137 ms
> 2.000149 192.168.24.123 -> 192.168.24.125 ICMP Echo (ping) request
> 2.000276 192.168.24.125 -> 192.168.24.123 ICMP Echo (ping) reply
> 2.208653 Cisco_c8:90:30 -> Cisco_c8:90:30 LOOP Reply
> 64 bytes from 192.168.24.125: icmp_seq=5 ttl=64 time=0.298 ms
> 3.000210 192.168.24.123 -> 192.168.24.125 ICMP Echo (ping) request
> 3.000501 192.168.24.125 -> 192.168.24.123 ICMP Echo (ping) reply
> 3.034484 Cisco_c8:90:30 -> CDP/VTP/DTP/PAgP/UDLD CDP Device ID:
> sw_admin-3.gridmip.cict.fr Port ID: FastEthernet0/48
> 64 bytes from 192.168.24.125: icmp_seq=6 ttl=64 time=0.213 ms
> 4.000290 192.168.24.123 -> 192.168.24.125 ICMP Echo (ping) request
> 4.000496 192.168.24.125 -> 192.168.24.123 ICMP Echo (ping) reply
> 64 bytes from 192.168.24.125: icmp_seq=7 ttl=64 time=0.128 ms
> 5.000360 192.168.24.123 -> 192.168.24.125 ICMP Echo (ping) request
> 5.000476 192.168.24.125 -> 192.168.24.123 ICMP Echo (ping) reply
> 64 bytes from 192.168.24.125: icmp_seq=8 ttl=64 time=0.291 ms
> 6.000424 192.168.24.123 -> 192.168.24.125 ICMP Echo (ping) request
> 6.000458 QuantaCo_e0:81:2c -> SunMicro_40:ca:75 ARP Who has
> 192.168.24.123? Tell 192.168.24.125
> 6.000467 SunMicro_40:ca:75 -> QuantaCo_e0:81:2c ARP 192.168.24.123
> is at 00:14:4f:40:ca:75
> 6.000708 192.168.24.125 -> 192.168.24.123 ICMP Echo (ping) reply
> 64 bytes from 192.168.24.125: icmp_seq=9 ttl=64 time=0.204 ms
> 7.000496 192.168.24.123 -> 192.168.24.125 ICMP Echo (ping) request
> 7.000693 192.168.24.125 -> 192.168.24.123 ICMP Echo (ping) reply
> 64 bytes from 192.168.24.125: icmp_seq=10 ttl=64 time=0.366 ms
> -------------->>> Launching the ping from dom1
> 7.497007 Xensourc_55:af:c3 -> Broadcast ARP Who has
> 192.168.24.125? Tell 192.168.24.81
> 8.000575 192.168.24.123 -> 192.168.24.125 ICMP Echo (ping) request
> 8.000932 192.168.24.125 -> 192.168.24.123 ICMP Echo (ping) reply
> 64 bytes from 192.168.24.125: icmp_seq=11 ttl=64 time=0.276 ms
> 8.497069 Xensourc_55:af:c3 -> Broadcast ARP Who has
> 192.168.24.125? Tell 192.168.24.81
> 9.000660 192.168.24.123 -> 192.168.24.125 ICMP Echo (ping) request
> 9.000928 192.168.24.125 -> 192.168.24.123 ICMP Echo (ping) reply
> 64 bytes from 192.168.24.125: icmp_seq=12 ttl=64 time=0.189 ms
> 9.497141 Xensourc_55:af:c3 -> Broadcast ARP Who has
> 192.168.24.125? Tell 192.168.24.81
> 10.000729 192.168.24.123 -> 192.168.24.125 ICMP Echo (ping) request
> 10.000912 192.168.24.125 -> 192.168.24.123 ICMP Echo (ping) reply
> 64 bytes from 192.168.24.125: icmp_seq=13 ttl=64 time=0.355 ms
> 10.517213 Xensourc_55:af:c3 -> Broadcast ARP Who has
> 192.168.24.125? Tell 192.168.24.81
> 11.000792 192.168.24.123 -> 192.168.24.125 ICMP Echo (ping) request
> 11.001140 192.168.24.125 -> 192.168.24.123 ICMP Echo (ping) reply
> 64 bytes from 192.168.24.125: icmp_seq=14 ttl=64 time=0.273 ms
> 11.517283 Xensourc_55:af:c3 -> Broadcast ARP Who has
> 192.168.24.125? Tell 192.168.24.81
> 12.000869 192.168.24.123 -> 192.168.24.125 ICMP Echo (ping) request
> 12.001136 192.168.24.125 -> 192.168.24.123 ICMP Echo (ping) reply
> 12.211749 Cisco_c8:90:30 -> Cisco_c8:90:30 LOOP Reply
> 64 bytes from 192.168.24.125: icmp_seq=15 ttl=64 time=0.174 ms
> 12.517356 Xensourc_55:af:c3 -> Broadcast ARP Who has
> 192.168.24.125? Tell 192.168.24.81
> 13.000938 192.168.24.123 -> 192.168.24.125 ICMP Echo (ping) request
> 13.001106 192.168.24.125 -> 192.168.24.123 ICMP Echo (ping) reply
> -------------->>> Stopping the ping from dom1
> 64 bytes from 192.168.24.125: icmp_seq=16 ttl=64 time=0.348 ms
> 14.000996 192.168.24.123 -> 192.168.24.125 ICMP Echo (ping) request
> 14.001338 192.168.24.125 -> 192.168.24.123 ICMP Echo (ping) reply
> 64 bytes from 192.168.24.125: icmp_seq=17 ttl=64 time=0.262 ms
> 15.001079 192.168.24.123 -> 192.168.24.125 ICMP Echo (ping) request
> 15.001335 192.168.24.125 -> 192.168.24.123 ICMP Echo (ping) reply
> 64 bytes from 192.168.24.125: icmp_seq=18 ttl=64 time=0.176 ms
> 16.001153 192.168.24.123 -> 192.168.24.125 ICMP Echo (ping) request
> 16.001322 192.168.24.125 -> 192.168.24.123 ICMP Echo (ping) reply
> 64 bytes from 192.168.24.125: icmp_seq=19 ttl=64 time=0.338 ms
> 17.001222 192.168.24.123 -> 192.168.24.125 ICMP Echo (ping) request
> 17.001554 192.168.24.125 -> 192.168.24.123 ICMP Echo (ping) reply
> 64 bytes from 192.168.24.125: icmp_seq=20 ttl=64 time=0.255 ms
> 18.001291 192.168.24.123 -> 192.168.24.125 ICMP Echo (ping) request
> 18.001539 192.168.24.125 -> 192.168.24.123 ICMP Echo (ping) reply
> 64 bytes from 192.168.24.125: icmp_seq=21 ttl=64 time=0.166 ms
> ^C 19.001359 192.168.24.123 -> 192.168.24.125 ICMP Echo (ping) request
> 19.001519 192.168.24.125 -> 192.168.24.123 ICMP Echo (ping) reply
> 56 packets captured
>
>
>
> > If you see requests going out, but no reply, try firing up a packet
> > sniffer on the remote machine and see if the requests are reaching it.
>
> I used tshark on the target too. No packet reaches it.
>
> > Also, apart from the initial messages* when you fire up the DomU, are
> > there any other bridge related messages in the logs ?
> > * From memory, it should log :
> > Interface added
> > Interface going into learning mode
> > Interface going into active mode
> >
>
> I found no such message in my logs, but I remember I saw them on
> the console, once when I had an access to it.
> But looking those messages, I found something I never saw before,
> because it was in /var/log/syslog, and I only looked in /var/log/xen/*
> so far:
> ----
> logger: /etc/xen/scripts/vif-bridge: Successful vif-bridge online for
> vif1.0, bridge eth0
> .
> logger: /etc/xen/scripts/block: Writing
> backend/vbd/1/51713/hotplug-status connected to x
> enstore.
> logger: /etc/xen/scripts/vif-bridge: Writing
> backend/vif/1/0/hotplug-status connected to
> xenstore.
> logger: /etc/xen/scripts/vif-bridge: iptables -A FORWARD -m physdev
> --physdev-in vif1.1
> -j ACCEPT failed.#012If you are using iptables, this may affect
> networking for guest domains.
> logger: /etc/xen/scripts/vif-bridge: Successful vif-bridge online for
> vif1.1, bridge eth1
> .
> logger: /etc/xen/scripts/vif-bridge: Writing
> backend/vif/1/1/hotplug-status connected to
> xenstore.
> ----
>
> When I invert the vifs in the dom1 description, I get the same error
> about iptables for the second vif.
> Have anyone any idea how I could follow down this new track ? iptables
> -nvL seems ok. Anything else to check for ?
>
> Regards and thanks,
> Philippe
Hello,
Udev rules are mandatory on Debian systems with XEN, I use it always and
in /etc/network/interfaces :
auto br0
iface br0 inet static
address 192.168.1.8
netmask 255.255.255.0
network 192.168.1.0
broadcast 192.168.1.255
mtu 1500
txqueuelen 4096
gateway 192.168.1.11
bridge_ports eth0
bridge_maxwait 1
Regards
JP P
>
> _______________________________________________
> Xen-users mailing list
> Xen-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> http://lists.xensource.com/xen-users
>
_______________________________________________
Xen-users mailing list
Xen-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-users
|
 |
Lists.xenproject.org is hosted with RackSpace, monitoring our |