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

[Xen-devel] Xen-4.1.0 and Xen-4.1.1-pre-rc1 xl create and xl destroy HVM domU do not remove related iptables vif and tap related entries


  • To: xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • From: Teck Choon Giam <giamteckchoon@xxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Tue, 19 Apr 2011 22:33:58 +0800
  • Delivery-date: Tue, 19 Apr 2011 07:35:47 -0700
  • Domainkey-signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:date:message-id:subject:from:to:content-type; b=wcbTtghZMV66L2e/Nf9d4SksX6HOCZTmjErx3cHgJ8Q9nT+ho5ARyj4nWGZRtVooiU Ylwsbmh/Us7FPAIttW9r9xujFodaTMXqgsgIvreV+Q+Mo18bg3YF3AuYnCdEHV6lBUDj gg0huMKM5U9nr4pk29PUo0ZPNis3nXd0XIAhM=
  • List-id: Xen developer discussion <xen-devel.lists.xensource.com>

Hi,

Does anyone test creating HVM domains using xl instead of xm then
destroy those domains and check with iptables -L -n output?

I noticed this iptables related old vif/tap entries still there issues
if I use xl to create HVM domUs such as windows XP etc. then either
shutdown or restart those domUs within the guest domUs or using xl
destroy those domUs guest.  Example, if I use xl create windowsXPhvm
then it is up and running using for example tap1.0/vif1.0.  If I
shutdown or restart that windowsXPhvm within the guest OS, the
tap1.0/vif1.0 rules chain still exists in iptables -L -n output.
There is no related devices in /proc/net/dev though and using xm
instead of xl function correctly.

Hope I explain it clearly and sorry for my bad english.

Thanks.

Kindest regards,
Giam Teck Choon

_______________________________________________
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®.