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

Re: [Xen-users] howto re-create XEN network bridge?


  • To: "Fajar A. Nugraha" <fajar@xxxxxxxxx>
  • From: Rudi Ahlers <Rudi@xxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Fri, 6 Nov 2009 18:19:22 +0200
  • Cc: xen-users <xen-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Delivery-date: Fri, 06 Nov 2009 08:20:23 -0800
  • Domainkey-signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:from:date :x-google-sender-auth:message-id:subject:to:cc:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; b=NenXzKhi4uST8HgyprusqgCFyez6KLNNv8eSaAzYRhJOa+xzdIB7ET2vseGMg8L7UE FKlA8K2/Znf2OOEsWXxf3cG89ad6e1VhPU49bliYWoi43a1IaL3eMT24xhlWz6sFA2Gl 2DQhtbV9x2UNInylWoHXu791sfE6ghinuMw7U=
  • List-id: Xen user discussion <xen-users.lists.xensource.com>

On Fri, Nov 6, 2009 at 12:59 PM, Fajar A. Nugraha <fajar@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 6, 2009 at 5:50 PM, Rudi Ahlers <Rudi@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
>> Here's the output of brctl show:
>>
>>
>> root@zaxen01:[~]$ brctl show
>> bridge name     bridge id               STP enabled     interfaces
>> xenbr0          8000.feffffffffff       no              vifpict0
>>                                                        vifandr0
>>                                                        vifzafe0
>>                                                        vifserv0
>>                                                        vifraft0
>>                                                        vifplut0
>>                                                        viferis0
>>                                                        vifbyra0
>>                                                        vifanim0
>>                                                        vifacti0
>>                                                        peth0
>>                                                        vif0.0
>>
>
> You can try by sniffing packets on uplink physical interface (should
> be peth0 in your case). Test with simple packets (like ping) and snoop
> it with tcpdump (something like "tcpdump -n -i peth0 icmp"). That
> would at least tell you whether packets can get to physical interface
> or not.
>
> If the traffic is there but somehow you still have problems, the
> source of problem might be elsewhere and not in your bridge setup.
> Might be switch blocking ports with many MACs, or router caching old
> MAC addresses.
>
> --
> Fajar
>
> _______________________________________________

Hi Fajar,

The packets does indeed get to the physical interface, but I get no
return ICMP packets, but it's almost asif that originating packets are
incomplete:

I got this from "tcpdump -n -i peth0 icmp" on the dom0 hostnode:

18:06:56.043744 IP 196.34.136.58 > 66.197.167.226: ICMP echo request,
id 34310, seq 1, length 64
18:06:57.053851 IP 196.34.136.58 > 66.197.167.226: ICMP echo request,
id 34310, seq 2, length 64


Yet, when I ping another VPS on the same dom0, I see an icmp reply:

[root@vps ~]# ping -c2 196.34.136.51
PING 196.34.136.51 (196.34.136.51) 56(84) bytes of data.
64 bytes from 196.34.136.51: icmp_seq=1 ttl=64 time=0.903 ms
64 bytes from 196.34.136.51: icmp_seq=2 ttl=64 time=0.115 ms




These IP's is completely open on the network firewall as well.



-- 
Kind Regards
Rudi Ahlers
CEO, SoftDux Hosting
Web: http://www.SoftDux.com
Office: 087 805 9573
Cell: 082 554 7532

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


 


Rackspace

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