[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Xen-users] Re: [Xen-devel] ARP problems with xen 4.0 with pvops kernel 2.6.32.15


  • To: Pasi Kärkkäinen <pasik@xxxxxx>
  • From: Boris Derzhavets <bderzhavets@xxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Wed, 9 Jun 2010 10:46:13 -0700 (PDT)
  • Cc: Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy@xxxxxxxx>, xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, luis.silva@xxxxxxxxxxxxx, xen-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • Delivery-date: Wed, 09 Jun 2010 10:47:31 -0700
  • Domainkey-signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=s1024; d=yahoo.com; h=Message-ID:X-YMail-OSG:Received:X-Mailer:Date:From:Subject:To:Cc:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=GE8f2cJqefRZwfgOhmE55OrBq4M7TQ/ijXtlbJR+0NZVNPbkK8KWZb3xa7ouC4AiwB9VVLcPhUoT3MQk0bhzYsPngvsSl4Cmef+USTUHP6tY/SzKvc/wmf054wRy1zltcC3RtZT51Btbr2obF9v5aI+vAB6PFaTnV7k69cX1+HU=;
  • List-id: Xen developer discussion <xen-devel.lists.xensource.com>

I've captured an exact error message in text virt-install console :-
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
  error 2 reading header: cpio: Bad magic

Running anaconda 13.42, the Fedora system installer - please wait.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Boris.
P.S. Xen 4.0.1-rc2-pre, 2.6.32.15 (the most recent commit)


--- On Wed, 6/9/10, Pasi Kärkkäinen <pasik@xxxxxx> wrote:

From: Pasi Kärkkäinen <pasik@xxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [Xen-users] Re: [Xen-devel] ARP problems with xen 4.0 with pvops kernel 2.6.32.15
To: "Boris Derzhavets" <bderzhavets@xxxxxxxxx>
Cc: "Jeremy Fitzhardinge" <jeremy@xxxxxxxx>, xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, luis.silva@xxxxxxxxxxxxx, xen-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Date: Wednesday, June 9, 2010, 8:54 AM

On Wed, Jun 09, 2010 at 05:47:42AM -0700, Boris Derzhavets wrote:
>    I was able to virt-install F13 PV DomU in nographics mode under Xen
>    4.0.1-rc2-pre (2.6.32.15 pvops c2cb3df04eb3ff68d0de102b2acacc9b8616e659)
>    at the point of extracting data from Apache mirror at Dom0 on top of
>    Ubuntu 10.04  ( text console mode message)
>    -------------------------------------------------
>     2 extracting cpio errors.  Bad Magic
>    -------------------------------------------------
>    However, virt-install proceeds further to promt "set up VNC at DomU"
>    and completed successfully.
>    VNC mode cannot pass through this extractions. It just hangs.
>

Yeah, there's something weird going on..

During the weekend I *think* I was successfully able to install guests
when they didn't have vfb set up at all.. but when I set up vfb (ie. used virt-manager)
the VM's started acting weird.. network problems, and problems in general,
VM's freezing..

I haven't had time to confirm that yet..

-- Pasi


>    Boris.
>
>    --- On Mon, 6/7/10, Pasi Kärkkäinen <pasik@xxxxxx> wrote:
>
>      From: Pasi Kärkkäinen <pasik@xxxxxx>
>      Subject: Re: [Xen-users] Re: [Xen-devel] ARP problems with xen 4.0 with
>      pvops kernel 2.6.32.15
>      To: "Boris Derzhavets" <bderzhavets@xxxxxxxxx>
>      Cc: "Jeremy Fitzhardinge" <jeremy@xxxxxxxx>,
>      xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, luis.silva@xxxxxxxxxxxxx,
>      xen-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>      Date: Monday, June 7, 2010, 3:55 AM
>
>      On Sun, Jun 06, 2010 at 11:54:11AM -0700, Boris Derzhavets wrote:
>      >    Virt-install hangs attempting to retrieve updates.img from Apache
>      Mirror
>      >    setup at Dom0
>      >    with kernel 2.6.32.15
>      >    It doesn't happen with 2.6.32.10 (12,14 final).
>      >    Environment Xen 4.0 Dom0 on top Ubuntu 10.04 Server. Libvirt is
>      0.8.0 .
>      >    Attempting  to virt-install F13 PV DomU in vnc mode.
>      >
>      >      I believe that builds are consistent.
>      >    Runtime behavior is the same for .10, .14, .15. Seems to be
>      communicating
>      >    problem between DomU and Dom0 during HTTP download.
>      >
>
>      I'm seeing PV domU network issues aswell.. when running Xen 4.0.0 on
>      Fedora 13.
>      I'll have to dig more into it..
>
>      -- Pasi
>
>      >    Boris.
>      >
>      >    --- On Sun, 6/6/10, Jeremy Fitzhardinge <[1]jeremy@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
>      >
>      >      From: Jeremy Fitzhardinge <[2]jeremy@xxxxxxxx>
>      >      Subject: Re: [Xen-users] Re: [Xen-devel] ARP problems with xen
>      4.0 with
>      >      pvops kernel 2.6.32.15
>      >      To: "Boris Derzhavets" <[3]bderzhavets@xxxxxxxxx>
>      >      Cc: [4]luis.silva@xxxxxxxxxxxxx,
>      [5]xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx,
>      >      [6]xen-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>      >      Date: Sunday, June 6, 2010, 12:43 PM
>      >
>      >      On 06/06/2010 03:19 AM, Boris Derzhavets wrote:
>      >      > Network issues when working with DomUs in 2.6.32.14 and finally
>      been
>      >      > fixed,
>      >      > seem to appear again in 2.6.32.15. Reverting to back to
>      xen/stable -
>      >      > 2.6.32.10
>      >      > works as a fix again.
>      >      >
>      >
>      >      There are no substantial differences between 2.6.32.14 and .15.
>      If
>      >      there are any differences in behaviour between them, then I'd
>      suspect
>      >      some inconsistency from boot to boot, or in your kernel build
>      process.
>      >
>      >          J
>      >
>      >      >
>      >      > Boris
>      >      >
>      >      > --- On *Thu, 6/3/10, Luís Silva
>      /<[1][7]luis.silva@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>/*
>      >      wrote:
>      >      >
>      >      >
>      >      >     From: Luís Silva <[2][8]luis.silva@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>      >      >     Subject: Re: [Xen-users] Re: [Xen-devel] ARP problems with
>      xen 4.0
>      >      >     with pvops kernel
>      >      >     To: "Boris Derzhavets" <[3][9]bderzhavets@xxxxxxxxx>
>      >      >     Cc: "Jeremy Fitzhardinge" <[4][10]jeremy@xxxxxxxx>,
>      >      >     [5][11]xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx,
>      [6][12]xen-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>      >      >     Date: Thursday, June 3, 2010, 6:20 AM
>      >      >
>      >      >     Hello,
>      >      >
>      >      >     Thanks for the suggestion, xen/stable works ok for me. Only
>      >      >     problem is that I have to disable offload do get dhcp to
>      work on
>      >      >     domU, but the problem I described before doesn't exist in
>      this
>      >      >     kernel. Later today I'm going to try a previous build I
>      have based
>      >      >     on stable-2.6.32.x (2.6.32.13) to check if it already had
>      this
>      >      >     problem or not and I'll post the results.
>      >      >
>      >      >     Luís
>      >      >
>      >      >     On Wed, 2010-06-02 at 12:26 -0700, Boris Derzhavets wrote:
>      >      >>     Could you,please, build and try 2.6.32.10 ( xen/stable) ?
>      >      >>
>      >      >>     Boris.
>      >      >>
>      >      >>     --- On *Wed, 6/2/10, Luís Silva
>      >      **/<[7][13]luis.silva@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>/*
>      >      >>     wrote:
>      >      >>
>      >      >>
>      >      >>         From: Luís Silva <[8][14]luis.silva@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>      >      >>         Subject: [Xen-users] Re: [Xen-devel] ARP problems with
>      xen
>      >      >>         4.0 with pvops kernel
>      >      >>         To: "Jeremy Fitzhardinge" <[9][15]jeremy@xxxxxxxx>
>      >      >>         Cc: [10][16]xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx,
>      >      [11][17]xen-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>      >      >>         Date: Wednesday, June 2, 2010, 2:53 PM
>      >      >>
>      >      >>         Hello,
>      >      >>
>      >      >>         On Wed, 2010-06-02 at 09:06 -0700, Jeremy Fitzhardinge
>      wrote:
>      >      >>>         On 06/02/2010 01:47 AM, Luís Silva wrote:
>      >      >>>         > Hello,
>      >      >>>         >
>      >      >>>         > I'm using the latest stable-2.6.32.x. I already
>      tried
>      >      "ethtool -K
>      >      >>>         > <bridge> tx off", but that didn't make any
>      difference.
>      >      Also, this only
>      >      >>>         > happen with pv, in hvm mode all works ok and the
>      domU sees
>      >      the arp
>      >      >>>         > messages...
>      >      >>>
>      >      >>>         Yes, ARP is a new twist on network problems.  I'm
>      guessing
>      >      you're using
>      >      >>>         hvm without stubdoms, which means that its networking
>      >      originates from
>      >      >>>         qemu within dom0, whereas PV and HVM+stubdom comes
>      via
>      >      netback.
>      >      >>>
>      >      >>>
>      >      >>         Yes, when I mentioned hvm I was talking about hvm
>      without
>      >      >>         stubdoms. I haven't tried those yet.
>      >      >>>         But aside from that, I'm stumped.  Are you running
>      any
>      >      firewalls on
>      >      >>>         either side?   Can you try disabling all the offloads
>      (tx,
>      >      rx, gso, tso)
>      >      >>>         on all the relevent interfaces (bridge, netback,
>      within the
>      >      guest) and
>      >      >>>         see if that changes anything?
>      >      >>>
>      >      >>>             J
>      >      >>>
>      >      >>>
>      >      >>
>      >      >>         Ok, this is the bridge interface:
>      >      >>
>      >      >>         brctl show
>      >      >>         bridge name    bridge id        STP enabled
>      interfaces
>      >      >>         virbr0        8000.feffffffffff    no        vif1.0
>      >      >>
>      >      >>         ifconfig virbr0
>      >      >>         virbr0    Link encap:Ethernet  HWaddr
>      c2:ef:67:2b:a4:23
>      >      >>                   inet addr:192.168.120.254
>      Bcast:192.168.120.255
>      >      Mask:255.255.255.0
>      >      >>                   inet6 addr: fe80::c0ef:67ff:fe2b:a423/64
>      Scope:Link
>      >      >>                   UP BROADCAST RUNNING MULTICAST  MTU:1500
>      Metric:1
>      >      >>                   RX packets:0 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0
>      frame:0
>      >      >>                   TX packets:25 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0
>      >      carrier:0
>      >      >>                   collisions:0 txqueuelen:0
>      >      >>                   RX bytes:0 (0.0
>      >      >>          B)
>      >      >>          TX bytes:4662 (4.6 KB)
>      >      >>
>      >      >>
>      >      >>
>      >      >>         I'm not using firewall other than the rules defined by
>      >      >>         libvirt. DomU has no firewall and the rules in dom0
>      are only
>      >      >>         these (virbr0 is natted to the outside, virbr1 is
>      routed. The
>      >      >>         result is the same in either one of them):
>      >      >>
>      >      >>         sudo iptables -L -n -v
>      >      >>         Chain INPUT (policy ACCEPT 241K packets, 53M bytes)
>      >      >>          pkts bytes target     prot opt in     out     source
>      >             destination
>      >      >>             0     0 ACCEPT     udp  --  virbr1 *
>         0.0.0.0/0
>      >            0.0.0.0/0           udp dpt:53
>      >      >>             0     0 ACCEPT     tcp  --  virbr1 *
>         0.0.0.0/0
>      >            0.0.0.0/0           tcp dpt:53
>      >      >>
>      >      >>
>      >      >>             0     0 ACCEPT     udp  --  virbr1 *
>         0.0.0.0/0
>      >            0.0.0.0/0           udp dpt:67
>      >      >>             0     0 ACCEPT     tcp  --  virbr1 *
>         0.0.0.0/0
>      >            0.0.0.0/0           tcp dpt:67
>      >      >>             8   515 ACCEPT     udp  --  virbr0 *
>         0.0.0.0/0
>      >            0.0.0.0/0           udp dpt:53
>      >      >>             0     0
>      >      >>
>      >      >>          ACCEPT     tcp  --  virbr0 *       0.0.0.0/0
>      >      0.0.0.0/0           tcp dpt:53
>      >      >>             0     0 ACCEPT     udp  --  virbr0 *
>         0.0.0.0/0
>      >            0.0.0.0/0           udp dpt:67
>      >      >>             0     0 ACCEPT     tcp  --  virbr0 *
>         0.0.0.0/0
>      >            0.0.0.0/0           tcp dpt:67
>      >      >>
>      >      >>         Chain FORWARD (policy ACCEPT 0 packets, 0 bytes)
>      >      >>          pkts bytes target
>      >      >>          prot
>      >      >>          opt in     out     source               destination
>      >      >>             0     0 ACCEPT     all  --  *      virbr1
>      0.0.0.0/0
>      >            192.168.121.0/24
>      >      >>             0     0 ACCEPT     all  --  virbr1 *
>      >         192.168.121.0/24     0.0.0.0/0
>      >      >>             0     0 ACCEPT     all  --  virbr1 virbr1
>      0.0.0.0/0
>      >
>      >      >>
>      >      >>          0.0.0.0/0
>      >      >>             0     0 REJECT     all  --  *      virbr1
>      0.0.0.0/0
>      >            0.0.0.0/0           reject-with icmp-port-unreachable
>      >      >>             0     0 REJECT     all  --  virbr1 *
>         0.0.0.0/0
>      >            0.0.0.0/0           reject-with icmp-port-unreachable
>      >      >>            13  3448 ACCEPT     all  --  *      virbr0
>      0.0.0.0/0
>      >            192.168.120.0/24
>      >      >>          state
>      >      >>          RELATED,ESTABLISHED
>      >      >>            16  1374 ACCEPT     all  --  virbr0 *
>      >         192.168.120.0/24     0.0.0.0/0
>      >      >>             0     0 ACCEPT     all  --  virbr0 virbr0
>      0.0.0.0/0
>      >            0.0.0.0/0
>      >      >>             0     0 REJECT     all  --  *      virbr0
>      0.0.0.0/0
>      >            0.0.0.0/0           reject-with icmp-port-unreachable
>      >      >>             0     0 REJECT     all  --
>      >      >>          virbr0
>      >      >>          *       0.0.0.0/0            0.0.0.0/0
>         reject-with
>      >      icmp-port-unreachable
>      >      >>
>      >      >>         Chain OUTPUT (policy ACCEPT 233K packets, 27M bytes)
>      >      >>          pkts bytes target     prot opt in     out     source
>      >             destination
>      >      >>
>      >      >>
>      >      >>
>      >      >>
>      >      >>         And these are the various offload parameters as set at
>      boot:
>      >      >>
>      >      >>         Offload parameters for virbr0:
>      >      >>         rx-checksumming: on
>      >      >>         tx-checksumming: on
>      >      >>         scatter-gather: on
>      >      >>         tcp-segmentation-offload: on
>      >      >>         udp-fragmentation-offload: on
>      >      >>         generic-segmentation-offload: on
>      >      >>         generic-receive-offload: off
>      >      >>         large-receive-offload: off
>      >      >>
>      >      >>         Offload parameters for vif1.0:
>      >      >>         rx-checksumming: on
>      >      >>         tx-checksumming: on
>      >      >>         scatter-gather: on
>      >      >>         tcp-segmentation-offload: on
>      >      >>         udp-fragmentation-offload: off
>      >      >>         generic-segmentation-offload: on
>      >      >>         generic-receive-offload: off
>      >      >>         large-receive-offload: off
>      >      >>
>      >      >>         Offload parameters for eth0:
>      >      >>         rx-checksumming: on
>      >      >>         tx-checksumming: on
>      >      >>         scatter-gather: on
>      >      >>         tcp-segmentation-offload: on
>      >      >>         udp-fragmentation-offload: off
>      >      >>         generic-segmentation-offload: off
>      >      >>         generic-receive-offload: off
>      >      >>         large-receive-offload: off
>      >      >>
>      >      >>
>      >      >>
>      >      >>         To disable all checksuming I run the following
>      commands:
>      >      >>         dom0:
>      >      >>
>      >      >>         sudo ethtool -K virbr0 tx off sg off tso off gso off
>      gro off
>      >      >>         sudo ethtool -K vif1.0 tx off sg off tso off gso off
>      gro off
>      >      >>
>      >      >>
>      >      >>         domU
>      >      >>
>      >      >>         sudo ethtool -K eth0 tx off sg off tso off gso off gro
>      off
>      >      >>
>      >      >>
>      >      >>
>      >      >>         This managed to get all parameter to off in the
>      mentioned
>      >      >>         interfaces, but unfortunately the result is the same.
>      The arp
>      >      >>         requests get to vif1.0, but not to eth0 on the domU.
>      >      >>
>      >      >>         sudo tcpdump -i vif1.0 -n -vv arp
>      >      >>         tcpdump: WARNING: vif1.0: no IPv4 address assigned
>      >      >>         tcpdump: listening on vif1.0, link-type EN10MB
>      (Ethernet),
>      >      capture size 96 bytes
>      >      >>         19:43:51.233378 ARP, Ethernet (len 6), IPv4 (len 4),
>      Request
>      >      who-has 192.168.120.1 tell 192.168.120.254, length 28
>      >      >>         19:43:52.233164 ARP, Ethernet (len 6), IPv4 (len 4),
>      Request
>      >      who-has 192.168.120.1 tell 192.168.120.254, length 28
>      >      >>         19:43:53.233166 ARP, Ethernet (len 6), IPv4 (len 4),
>      Request
>      >      who-has 192.168.120.1 tell 192.168.120.254, length 28
>      >      >>         19:43:54.684214 ARP, Ethernet (len 6), IPv4 (len 4),
>      Request
>      >      who-has 192.168.120.1 tell 192.168.120.254, length 28
>      >      >>         19:43:55.684218 ARP, Ethernet (len 6), IPv4 (len 4),
>      Request
>      >      who-has 192.168.120.1 tell 192.168.120.254, length 28
>      >      >>         19:43:56.684232 ARP, Ethernet (len 6), IPv4 (len 4),
>      Request
>      >      who-has 192.168.120.1 tell 192.168.120.254, length 28
>      >      >>
>      >      >>
>      >      >>
>      >      >>         I hope this information is enough. If I can provide
>      anything
>      >      >>         else to help debug or test, please just ask! ;)
>      >      >>
>      >      >>         Thanks in advance,
>      >      >>         Luís
>      >      >>
>      >      >>>         >
>      >      >>>         > Thanks,
>      >      >>>         > Luís
>      >      >>>         >
>      >      >>>         > On Tue, 2010-06-01 at 18:20 -0700, Jeremy
>      Fitzhardinge
>      >      wrote:
>      >      >>>         >> On 06/01/2010 05:38 PM, Luís Silva wrote:
>      >      >>>         >> > Hello,
>      >      >>>         >> >
>      >      >>>         >> > Finally I managed to get a xen 4.0 working on
>      ubuntu
>      >      10.04 with pvops
>      >      >>>         >> > kernel and libvirt. However I am having some
>      problems
>      >      with
>      >      >>>         >> > networking... after initial installation with
>      >      netinstall image in hvm
>      >      >>>         >> > mode, when I transform the vm in xen pv (via
>      pygrub
>      >      with the current
>      >      >>>         >> > ubuntu kernel), networking startEd to act
>      weird...
>      >      >>>         >> >
>      >      >>>         >> > Basically I'm not using a network script from
>      xen. I
>      >      define a bridge
>      >      >>>         >> > (manually or via libvirt, the result is the
>      same) and I
>      >      use vif-bridge
>      >      >>>         >> > to connect the vif to it. But now the weird part
>      comes:
>      >      I can
>      >      >>>         >> > communicate from domU to dom0, but not the other
>      way
>      >      >>>          around,
>      >      >>>          unless I
>      >      >>>         >> > keep a ping running from domU to dom0... That's
>      right,
>      >      weird... while
>      >      >>>         >> > trying the ping from dom0 to domU, I used
>      tcpdump both
>      >      on the bridge,
>      >      >>>         >> > on the vif and on the eth0 in the domU. The arp
>      packets
>      >      never get to
>      >      >>>         >> > domU, but they appear both in the bridge and the
>      vif
>      >      sniff's...
>      >      >>>         >>
>      >      >>>         >> What version of kernel are you using in dom0 and
>      domU?
>      >      There was a
>      >      >>>         >> netback bug which caused problems with dom0<->domU
>      >      communication, but it
>      >      >>>         >> has been fixed for a while in 2.6.32 (but only
>      recently
>      >      in .31).  The
>      >      >>>         >> workaround is to disable tx checksum offload on
>      your
>      >      bridge (ethtool -K
>      >      >>>         >> <bridge> tx off).
>      >      >>>         >>
>      >      >>>         >>     J
>      >      >>>         >>
>      >      >>>         >> >
>      >      >>>         >> > Here is the bridge:
>      >      >>>         >> > ifconfig virbr0
>      >      >>>         >> > virbr0    Link encap:Ethernet  HWaddr
>      >      fe:ff:ff:ff:ff:ff
>      >      >>>         >> >
>      >      >>>
>      >      >>>          inet addr:192.168.120.254  Bcast:192.168.120.255
>      >      Mask:255.255.255.0
>      >      >>>         >> >           inet6 addr:
>      fe80::7cee:4bff:fe82:e63f/64
>      >      Scope:Link
>      >      >>>         >> >           UP BROADCAST RUNNING MULTICAST
>      MTU:1500
>      >      Metric:1
>      >      >>>         >> >           RX packets:16 errors:0 dropped:0
>      overruns:0
>      >      frame:0
>      >      >>>         >> >           TX packets:226 errors:0 dropped:0
>      overruns:0
>      >      carrier:0
>      >      >>>         >> >           collisions:0 txqueuelen:0
>      >      >>>         >> >           RX bytes:952 (952.0 B)  TX bytes:13953
>      (13.9
>      >      KB)
>      >      >>>         >> >
>      >      >>>         >> >
>      >      >>>         >> > brctl show
>      >      >>>         >> > bridge name    bridge id        STP enabled
>      >      interfaces
>      >      >>>         >> > virbr0        8000.feffffffffff    no
>      vif5.0
>      >      >>>         >> >
>      >      >>>         >> >
>      >      >>>         >> > tcpdump -i virbr0 -vv -n
>      >      >>>         >> > tcpdump: listening on virbr0, link-type EN10MB
>      >      (Ethernet), capture size 96 bytes
>      >      >>>         >> > 01:31:25.945151 IP (tos 0x0, ttl 64, id 0,
>      offset 0,
>      >      flags [DF],
>      >      >>>          proto ICMP (1),
>      >      >>>          length 84)
>      >      >>>         >> >     192.168.120.254 > 192.168.120.1: ICMP echo
>      request,
>      >      id 10317, seq 1, length 64
>      >      >>>         >> > 01:31:26.945361 IP (tos 0x0, ttl 64, id 0,
>      offset 0,
>      >      flags [DF], proto ICMP (1), length 84)
>      >      >>>         >> >     192.168.120.254 > 192.168.120.1: ICMP echo
>      request,
>      >      id 10317, seq 2, length 64
>      >      >>>         >> > 01:31:27.945420 IP (tos 0x0, ttl 64, id 0,
>      offset 0,
>      >      flags [DF], proto ICMP (1), length 84)
>      >      >>>         >> >     192.168.120.254 > 192.168.120.1: ICMP echo
>      request,
>      >      id 10317, seq 3, length 64
>      >      >>>         >> > 01:31:28.945362 IP (tos 0x0, ttl 64, id 0,
>      offset 0,
>      >      flags [DF], proto ICMP (1), length 84)
>      >      >>>         >> >     192.168.120.254 > 192.168.120.1: ICMP echo
>      request,
>      >      id 10317, seq 4, length 64
>      >      >>>         >> > 01:31:29.945364 IP (tos 0x0, ttl 64, id 0,
>      offset 0,
>      >      flags [DF], proto ICMP (1), length 84)
>      >      >>>         >> >     192.168.120.254 > 192.168.120.1: ICMP echo
>      request,
>      >      id 10317,
>      >      >>>          seq 5, length
>      >      >>>          64
>      >      >>>         >> > 01:31:30.944300 ARP, Ethernet (len 6), IPv4 (len
>      4),
>      >      Request who-has 192.168.120.1 tell 192.168.120.254, length 28
>      >      >>>         >> > 01:31:30.945359 IP (tos 0x0, ttl 64, id 0,
>      offset 0,
>      >      flags [DF], proto ICMP (1), length 84)
>      >      >>>         >> >     192.168.120.254 > 192.168.120.1: ICMP echo
>      request,
>      >      id 10317, seq 6, length 64
>      >      >>>         >> > 01:31:31.944297 ARP, Ethernet (len 6), IPv4 (len
>      4),
>      >      Request who-has 192.168.120.1 tell 192.168.120.254, length 28
>      >      >>>         >> > 01:31:31.945444 IP (tos 0x0, ttl 64, id 0,
>      offset 0,
>      >      flags [DF], proto ICMP (1), length 84)
>      >      >>>         >> >     192.168.120.254 > 192.168.120.1: ICMP echo
>      request,
>      >      id 10317, seq 7, length 64
>      >      >>>         >> > 01:31:32.944294 ARP, Ethernet (len 6), IPv4 (len
>      4),
>      >      Request who-has 192.168.120.1 tell 192.168.120.254, length 28
>      >      >>>         >> > 01:31:32.945401 IP (tos 0x0, ttl 64, id 0,
>      offset 0,
>      >      flags [DF], proto ICMP (1), length 84)
>      >      >>>         >> >
>      >      >>>
>      >      >>>          192.168.120.254 > 192.168.120.1: ICMP echo request,
>      id
>      >      10317, seq 8, length 64
>      >      >>>         >> > 01:31:33.947293 ARP, Ethernet (len 6), IPv4 (len
>      4),
>      >      Request who-has 192.168.120.1 tell 192.168.120.254, length 28
>      >      >>>         >> > 01:31:34.947373 ARP, Ethernet (len 6), IPv4 (len
>      4),
>      >      Request who-has 192.168.120.1 tell 192.168.120.254, length 28
>      >      >>>         >> > 01:31:35.947353 ARP, Ethernet (len 6), IPv4 (len
>      4),
>      >      Request who-has 192.168.120.1 tell 192.168.120.254, length 28
>      >      >>>         >> > 01:31:37.948352 ARP, Ethernet (len 6), IPv4 (len
>      4),
>      >      Request who-has 192.168.120.1 tell 192.168.120.254, length 28
>      >      >>>         >> > 01:31:38.948399 ARP, Ethernet (len 6), IPv4 (len
>      4),
>      >      Request who-has 192.168.120.1 tell 192.168.120.254, length 28
>      >      >>>         >> > 01:31:39.948376 ARP, Ethernet (len 6), IPv4 (len
>      4),
>      >      Request who-has 192.168.120.1 tell 192.168.120.254, length 28
>      >      >>>         >> > 01:31:40.949356 ARP, Ethernet (len 6), IPv4 (len
>      4),
>      >      Request
>      >      >>>          who-has
>      >      >>>          192.168.120.1 tell 192.168.120.254, length 28
>      >      >>>         >> >
>      >      >>>         >> >
>      >      >>>         >> > tcpdump -i vif5.0 -vv -n
>      >      >>>         >> > tcpdump: WARNING: vif5.0: no IPv4 address
>      assigned
>      >      >>>         >> > tcpdump: listening on vif5.0, link-type EN10MB
>      >      (Ethernet), capture size 96 bytes
>      >      >>>         >> > 01:32:19.956358 ARP, Ethernet (len 6), IPv4 (len
>      4),
>      >      Request who-has 192.168.120.1 tell 192.168.120.254, length 28
>      >      >>>         >> > 01:32:20.956358 ARP, Ethernet (len 6), IPv4 (len
>      4),
>      >      Request who-has 192.168.120.1 tell 192.168.120.254, length 28
>      >      >>>         >> > 01:32:21.956359 ARP, Ethernet (len 6), IPv4 (len
>      4),
>      >      Request who-has 192.168.120.1 tell 192.168.120.254, length 28
>      >      >>>         >> > 01:32:23.957311 ARP, Ethernet (len 6), IPv4 (len
>      4),
>      >      Request who-has 192.168.120.1 tell 192.168.120.254, length 28
>      >      >>>         >> > 01:32:24.957312 ARP, Ethernet (len 6), IPv4 (len
>      4),
>      >      Request who-has 192.168.120.1 tell 192.168.120.254, length
>      >      >>>          28
>      >      >>>         >> >
>      >      >>>          01:32:25.957359 ARP, Ethernet (len 6), IPv4 (len 4),
>      >      Request who-has 192.168.120.1 tell 192.168.120.254, length 28
>      >      >>>         >> > 01:32:27.958360 ARP, Ethernet (len 6), IPv4 (len
>      4),
>      >      Request who-has 192.168.120.1 tell 192.168.120.254, length 28
>      >      >>>         >> > 01:32:28.958310 ARP, Ethernet (len 6), IPv4 (len
>      4),
>      >      Request who-has 192.168.120.1 tell 192.168.120.254, length 28
>      >      >>>         >> > 01:32:29.958362 ARP, Ethernet (len 6), IPv4 (len
>      4),
>      >      Request who-has 192.168.120.1 tell 192.168.120.254, length 28
>      >      >>>         >> >
>      >      >>>         >> >
>      >      >>>         >> >
>      >      >>>         >> > Forwarding and iptables don't seem to be the
>      problem,
>      >      because if I
>      >      >>>         >> > initiate a ping from domU (at the same time as
>      the
>      >      failing one from
>      >      >>>         >> > dom0), the ping in dom0 starts to work. As soon
>      as I
>      >      stop the ping in
>      >      >>>         >> > domU, the one in dom0 starts failing again...
>      >      >>>         >> >
>      >      >>>         >> > Is anyone having the same
>      >      >>>          problem? Is this a bug
>      >      >>>          in the kernel? In
>      >      >>>         >> > dom0 or domU?
>      >      >>>         >> >
>      >      >>>         >> > Thanks in advance,
>      >      >>>         >> > Luís
>      >      >>>         >> >
>      >      >>>         >> >
>      >      >>>         >> > _______________________________________________
>      >      >>>         >> > Xen-devel mailing list
>      >      >>>         >> > [12][18]Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>      >      <mailto:[13][19]Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>      >      <mailto:[14][20]Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>      >      >>>         >> > [15][21]http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel
>      >      >>>         >> >
>      >      >>>         >>
>      >      >>>         >>
>      >      >>>         >> _______________________________________________
>      >      >>>         >> Xen-devel mailing list
>      >      >>>         >> [16][22]Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>      >      <mailto:[17][23]Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>      >      <mailto:[18][24]Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>      >      >>>         >> [19][25]http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel
>      >      >>>         >>
>      >      >>>         >>
>      >      >>>         >
>      >      >>>
>      >      >>>
>      >      >>>
>      >      >>
>      >      >>
>      >      >>
>      >      >>         -----Inline Attachment Follows-----
>      >      >>
>      >      >>         _______________________________________________
>      >      >>         Xen-users mailing list
>      >      >>         [20][26]Xen-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>      >      >>         [21][27]http://lists.xensource.com/xen-users
>      >      >>
>      >      >>
>      >      >
>      >      >
>      >      >     -----Inline Attachment Follows-----
>      >      >
>      >      >     _______________________________________________
>      >      >     Xen-users mailing list
>      >      >     [22][28]Xen-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>      >      >     </mc/compose?to=[23][29]Xen-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>      >      >     [24][30]http://lists.xensource.com/xen-users
>      >      >
>      >      >
>      >
>      > References
>      >
>      >    Visible links
>      >    1. file:///mc/compose?to=[31]luis.silva@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
>      >    2. file:///mc/compose?to=[32]luis.silva@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
>      >    3. file:///mc/compose?to=[33]bderzhavets@xxxxxxxxx
>      >    4. file:///mc/compose?to=[34]jeremy@xxxxxxxx
>      >    5. file:///mc/compose?to=[35]xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>      >    6. file:///mc/compose?to=[36]xen-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>      >    7. file:///mc/compose?to=[37]luis.silva@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
>      >    8. file:///mc/compose?to=[38]luis.silva@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
>      >    9. file:///mc/compose?to=[39]jeremy@xxxxxxxx
>      >   10. file:///mc/compose?to=[40]xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>      >   11. file:///mc/compose?to=[41]xen-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>      >   12. file:///mc/compose?to=[42]Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>      >   13. file:///mc/compose?to=[43]Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>      >   14. file:///mc/compose?to=[44]Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>      >   15. [45]http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel
>      >   16. file:///mc/compose?to=[46]Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>      >   17. file:///mc/compose?to=[47]Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>      >   18. file:///mc/compose?to=[48]Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>      >   19. [49]http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel
>      >   20. file:///mc/compose?to=[50]Xen-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>      >   21. [51]http://lists.xensource.com/xen-users
>      >   22. file:///mc/compose?to=[52]Xen-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>      >   23. file:///mc/compose?to=[53]Xen-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>      >   24. [54]http://lists.xensource.com/xen-users
>
>      > _______________________________________________
>      > Xen-devel mailing list
>      > [55]Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>      > [56]http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel
>
>      _______________________________________________
>      Xen-devel mailing list
>      [57]Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>      [58]http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel
>
> References
>
>    Visible links
>    1. file:///mc/compose?to=jeremy@xxxxxxxx
>    2. file:///mc/compose?to=jeremy@xxxxxxxx
>    3. file:///mc/compose?to=bderzhavets@xxxxxxxxx
>    4. file:///mc/compose?to=luis.silva@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
>    5. file:///mc/compose?to=xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>    6. file:///mc/compose?to=xen-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>    7. file:///mc/compose?to=luis.silva@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
>    8. file:///mc/compose?to=luis.silva@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
>    9. file:///mc/compose?to=bderzhavets@xxxxxxxxx
>   10. file:///mc/compose?to=jeremy@xxxxxxxx
>   11. file:///mc/compose?to=xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>   12. file:///mc/compose?to=xen-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>   13. file:///mc/compose?to=luis.silva@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
>   14. file:///mc/compose?to=luis.silva@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
>   15. file:///mc/compose?to=jeremy@xxxxxxxx
>   16. file:///mc/compose?to=xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>   17. file:///mc/compose?to=xen-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>   18. file:///mc/compose?to=Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>   19. file:///mc/compose?to=Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>   20. file:///mc/compose?to=Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>   21. http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel
>   22. file:///mc/compose?to=Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>   23. file:///mc/compose?to=Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>   24. file:///mc/compose?to=Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>   25. http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel
>   26. file:///mc/compose?to=Xen-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>   27. http://lists.xensource.com/xen-users
>   28. file:///mc/compose?to=Xen-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>   29. file:///mc/compose?to=Xen-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>   30. http://lists.xensource.com/xen-users
>   31. file:///mc/compose?to=luis.silva@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
>   32. file:///mc/compose?to=luis.silva@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
>   33. file:///mc/compose?to=bderzhavets@xxxxxxxxx
>   34. file:///mc/compose?to=jeremy@xxxxxxxx
>   35. file:///mc/compose?to=xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>   36. file:///mc/compose?to=xen-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>   37. file:///mc/compose?to=luis.silva@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
>   38. file:///mc/compose?to=luis.silva@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
>   39. file:///mc/compose?to=jeremy@xxxxxxxx
>   40. file:///mc/compose?to=xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>   41. file:///mc/compose?to=xen-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>   42. file:///mc/compose?to=Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>   43. file:///mc/compose?to=Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>   44. file:///mc/compose?to=Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>   45. http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel
>   46. file:///mc/compose?to=Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>   47. file:///mc/compose?to=Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>   48. file:///mc/compose?to=Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>   49. http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel
>   50. file:///mc/compose?to=Xen-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>   51. http://lists.xensource.com/xen-users
>   52. file:///mc/compose?to=Xen-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>   53. file:///mc/compose?to=Xen-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>   54. http://lists.xensource.com/xen-users
>   55. file:///mc/compose?to=Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>   56. http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel
>   57. file:///mc/compose?to=Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>   58. http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel

_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel

_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel

 


Rackspace

Lists.xenproject.org is hosted with RackSpace, monitoring our
servers 24x7x365 and backed by RackSpace's Fanatical Support®.