|
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] Re: [Xen-users] Yet another question about multiple NICs
Hi Philippe,
I forgot about Xen's renaming... The firewall rules do nothing special,
they won't hurt anything.
Ip addresses are also correct (on both sides), but the routes are
probably not ok:
- The dom1 does not have a default route - so it will not be able to
reach anything outside the two subnets (but should reach anything inside
of them).
- It's interesting that dom1's firewall output shows that no packages
were processed, so maybe you didn't ping anything since the last reboot
from dom1 or the firewall was loaded by reading it's statistics...
Still no reasons why you can't ping local machines from the dom1 (and
sometimes even not from dom0). Have you tried pinging each other, so
dom0 -> dom1 and vice versa?
The only remaining thing that denies communication would be ARP, so the
output of:
# ip neigh show
on both machines *directly after* a ping would be nice (within a few
seconds - use && and a time-terminated ping).
Regards,
Felix
Am 17.12.2010 13:32, schrieb Philippe Combes:
> Hi Felix,
>
> After so long fighting alone with this, it gives some comfort to have
> so quick an answer. Thanks.
>
> Felix Kuperjans a Ãcrit :
>> just some questions:
>> - Do you use a firewall in dom0 oder domU?
>
> No. Unless there is some default hidden firewall in the default
> installation of debian lenny :)
>
>> - Are those two physical interfaces probably connected to the same
>> physical network?
>
> No. I wrote: "each in a different LAN". This is what I meant. To
> connect both networks to one another, I would need a routing machine.
>
>> - Can you post the outputs of the following commands in both dom0 and
>> domU when your setup has just startet:
>
> In dom0...
> --
> $ ip addr show
> 1: lo: <LOOPBACK,UP,LOWER_UP> mtu 16436 qdisc noqueue state UNKNOWN
> link/loopback 00:00:00:00:00:00 brd 00:00:00:00:00:00
> inet 127.0.0.1/8 scope host lo
> inet6 ::1/128 scope host
> valid_lft forever preferred_lft forever
> 2: peth0: <BROADCAST,MULTICAST,PROMISC,UP,LOWER_UP> mtu 1500 qdisc
> pfifo_fast state UP qlen 1000
> link/ether 00:14:4f:40:ca:74 brd ff:ff:ff:ff:ff:ff
> inet6 fe80::214:4fff:fe40:ca74/64 scope link
> valid_lft forever preferred_lft forever
> 3: peth1: <BROADCAST,MULTICAST,PROMISC,UP,LOWER_UP> mtu 1500 qdisc
> pfifo_fast state UP qlen 100
> link/ether 00:14:4f:40:ca:75 brd ff:ff:ff:ff:ff:ff
> inet6 fe80::214:4fff:fe40:ca75/64 scope link
> valid_lft forever preferred_lft forever
> 4: eth2: <BROADCAST,MULTICAST> mtu 1500 qdisc noop state DOWN qlen 1000
> link/ether 00:14:4f:40:ca:76 brd ff:ff:ff:ff:ff:ff
> 5: eth3: <BROADCAST,MULTICAST> mtu 1500 qdisc noop state DOWN qlen 1000
> link/ether 00:14:4f:40:ca:77 brd ff:ff:ff:ff:ff:ff
> 6: vif0.0: <BROADCAST,MULTICAST> mtu 1500 qdisc noop state DOWN
> link/ether fe:ff:ff:ff:ff:ff brd ff:ff:ff:ff:ff:ff
> 7: veth0: <BROADCAST,MULTICAST> mtu 1500 qdisc noop state DOWN
> link/ether 00:00:00:00:00:00 brd ff:ff:ff:ff:ff:ff
> 8: vif0.1: <BROADCAST,MULTICAST> mtu 1500 qdisc noop state DOWN
> link/ether fe:ff:ff:ff:ff:ff brd ff:ff:ff:ff:ff:ff
> 9: veth1: <BROADCAST,MULTICAST> mtu 1500 qdisc noop state DOWN
> link/ether 00:00:00:00:00:00 brd ff:ff:ff:ff:ff:ff
> 10: vif0.2: <BROADCAST,MULTICAST> mtu 1500 qdisc noop state DOWN
> link/ether fe:ff:ff:ff:ff:ff brd ff:ff:ff:ff:ff:ff
> 11: veth2: <BROADCAST,MULTICAST> mtu 1500 qdisc noop state DOWN
> link/ether 00:00:00:00:00:00 brd ff:ff:ff:ff:ff:ff
> 12: vif0.3: <BROADCAST,MULTICAST> mtu 1500 qdisc noop state DOWN
> link/ether fe:ff:ff:ff:ff:ff brd ff:ff:ff:ff:ff:ff
> 13: veth3: <BROADCAST,MULTICAST> mtu 1500 qdisc noop state DOWN
> link/ether 00:00:00:00:00:00 brd ff:ff:ff:ff:ff:ff
> 14: eth0: <BROADCAST,MULTICAST,UP,LOWER_UP> mtu 1500 qdisc noqueue
> state UNKNOWN
> link/ether 00:14:4f:40:ca:74 brd ff:ff:ff:ff:ff:ff
> inet 172.16.113.121/25 brd 172.16.113.127 scope global eth0
> inet6 fe80::214:4fff:fe40:ca74/64 scope link
> valid_lft forever preferred_lft forever
> 15: eth1: <BROADCAST,MULTICAST,UP,LOWER_UP> mtu 1500 qdisc noqueue
> state UNKNOWN
> link/ether 00:14:4f:40:ca:75 brd ff:ff:ff:ff:ff:ff
> inet 192.168.24.123/25 brd 192.168.24.127 scope global eth1
> inet6 fe80::214:4fff:fe40:ca75/64 scope link
> valid_lft forever preferred_lft forever
> 16: vif1.0: <BROADCAST,MULTICAST,PROMISC,UP,LOWER_UP> mtu 1500 qdisc
> pfifo_fast state UNKNOWN qlen 32
> link/ether fe:ff:ff:ff:ff:ff brd ff:ff:ff:ff:ff:ff
> inet6 fe80::fcff:ffff:feff:ffff/64 scope link
> valid_lft forever preferred_lft forever
> 17: vif1.1: <BROADCAST,MULTICAST,PROMISC,UP,LOWER_UP> mtu 1500 qdisc
> pfifo_fast state UNKNOWN qlen 32
> link/ether fe:ff:ff:ff:ff:ff brd ff:ff:ff:ff:ff:ff
> inet6 fe80::fcff:ffff:feff:ffff/64 scope link
> valid_lft forever preferred_lft forever
> --
>
> --
> $ ip route show
> 172.16.113.0/25 dev eth0 proto kernel scope link src 172.16.113.121
> 192.168.24.0/25 dev eth1 proto kernel scope link src 192.168.24.123
> default via 192.168.24.125 dev eth1
> default via 172.16.113.126 dev eth0
>
> I tried to remove the first 'default' route, with route del
> default..., but nothing changed.
> --
>
> --
> $ iptables -nvL
> Chain INPUT (policy ACCEPT 744 packets, 50919 bytes)
> pkts bytes target prot opt in out source destination
>
> Chain FORWARD (policy ACCEPT 22 packets, 1188 bytes)
> pkts bytes target prot opt in out source destination
> 3 219 ACCEPT all -- * * 0.0.0.0/0
> 0.0.0.0/0 PHYSDEV match --physdev-in vif1.0
>
> Chain OUTPUT (policy ACCEPT 582 packets, 76139 bytes)
> pkts bytes target prot opt in out source destination
> --
>
> --
> $ brctl show
> bridge name bridge id STP enabled interfaces
> eth0 8000.00144f40ca74 no peth0
> vif1.0
> eth1 8000.00144f40ca75 no peth1
> vif1.1
> --
>
>
> In the dom1...
> --
> # ip addr show
> 1: lo: <LOOPBACK,UP,LOWER_UP> mtu 16436 qdisc noqueue state UNKNOWN
> link/loopback 00:00:00:00:00:00 brd 00:00:00:00:00:00
> inet 127.0.0.1/8 scope host lo
> inet6 ::1/128 scope host
> valid_lft forever preferred_lft forever
> 2: eth0: <BROADCAST,MULTICAST,UP,LOWER_UP> mtu 1500 qdisc pfifo_fast
> state UNKNOWN qlen 1000
> link/ether 00:16:3e:55:af:c2 brd ff:ff:ff:ff:ff:ff
> inet 172.16.113.81/25 brd 172.16.113.127 scope global eth0
> inet6 fe80::216:3eff:fe55:afc2/64 scope link
> valid_lft forever preferred_lft forever
> 3: eth1: <BROADCAST,MULTICAST,UP,LOWER_UP> mtu 1500 qdisc pfifo_fast
> state UNKNOWN qlen 1000
> link/ether 00:16:3e:55:af:c3 brd ff:ff:ff:ff:ff:ff
> inet 192.168.24.81/25 brd 192.168.24.127 scope global eth1
> inet6 fe80::216:3eff:fe55:afc3/64 scope link
> valid_lft forever preferred_lft forever
> --
>
> --
> # ip route show
> 172.16.113.0/25 dev eth0 proto kernel scope link src 172.16.113.81
> 192.168.24.0/25 dev eth1 proto kernel scope link src 192.168.24.81
> --
>
> --
> # iptables -nvL
> Chain INPUT (policy ACCEPT 0 packets, 0 bytes)
> pkts bytes target prot opt in out source destination
>
> Chain FORWARD (policy ACCEPT 0 packets, 0 bytes)
> pkts bytes target prot opt in out source destination
>
> Chain OUTPUT (policy ACCEPT 0 packets, 0 bytes)
> pkts bytes target prot opt in out source destination
> --
>
>
>
> I could not see anything weird in these outputs. Can you ?
>
>
>> - Is your bridge really named equally to your network interface (i.e.
>> both eth0) or is the network interface renamed? Probably something got
>> confused there (ip addr will show it anyway).
>
> In Xen 3.2.1, the network-bridge script renames eth<i> to peth<i>,
> bring it down and set a bridge with the name eth<i>.
>
>
> Regards,
> Philippe
>
>
>>
>> Am 17.12.2010 11:57, schrieb Philippe Combes:
>>> Dear Xen users,
>>>
>>> I have tried for weeks to have a domU connected to both NICs of the
>>> dom0, each in a different LAN. Google gave me plenty of tutos
>>> and HowTos about the subject, including the Xen and the Debian Xen
>>> wiki's, of course. It seems so simple !
>>> Some advise to use a simple wrapper to /etc/xen/network-bridge, others
>>> to let it aside and to set bridges on my own.
>>> But there must be something obvious that I miss, something so obvious
>>> that no manual need to explain it, because I tried every solution and
>>> variant I found on the Internet with no success.
>>>
>>> My dom0 first ran CentOS 5.5, Xen 3.0.3. I tried to have eth1 up and
>>> configured both in dom0 and in a domU. I never succeeded (details
>>> below), so I followed the advice of some colleagues who told me my
>>> issues might have come from running a Debian lenny domU on a CentOS
>>> dom0 (because the domU used the CentOS kernel instead of the one of
>>> Debian lenny, which is more recent).
>>>
>>> So now my dom0 runs an up-to-date Debian lenny, with Xen 3.2.1, but I
>>> have the same behaviour when trying to get two interfaces in a domU.
>>> As I said it before, I tried several configurations, but let's stick
>>> for now to one based on the network-bridge script.
>>> In /etc/network/interfaces:
>>> auto eth0
>>> iface eth0 inet dhcp
>>> auto eth1
>>> iface eth1 inet dhcp
>>> In /etc/xen/xend-config.sxp:
>>> (network-script network-bridge-wrapper)
>>> /etc/xen/scripts/network-bridge-wrapper:
>>> #!/bin/bash
>>> dir=$(dirname "$0")
>>> "$dir/network-bridge" "$@" vifnum=0 netdev=eth0 bridge=eth0
>>> "$dir/network-bridge" "$@" vifnum=1 netdev=eth1 bridge=eth1
>>> In domU configuration file:
>>> vif = [ 'mac=00:16:3E:55:AF:C2,bridge=eth0',
>>> 'mac=00:16:3E:55:AF:C3,bridge=eth1' ]
>>>
>>> With this configuration, I get both bridges eth<i> configured and
>>> usable: I mean I can ping one machine of every LAN through the
>>> corresponding interface.
>>>
>>> When I start a domU however, the dom0 and the domU are alternatively
>>> connected to the LAN of eth1, but mutually exclusively. In other
>>> words, the dom0 is connected to the LAN on eth1 for a couple of
>>> minutes, but not the domU, and then, with no other reason than
>>> inactivity on the interface, it switches to the reverse situation:
>>> domU connected, not the dom0. After another couple of minutes of
>>> inactivity, back to the first situation, and so on...
>>> I noticed that the 'switch' does not occur if the one that is
>>> currently connected performs a continuous ping on another machine of
>>> the LAN.
>>>
>>> This happened with the CentOS too. But I did not try anything else
>>> under that distro. Under Debian, I tried to have dom0's eth1 down (no
>>> IP), but then the domU's eth1 does not work at all, not even
>>> periodically.
>>>
>>> I was pretty sure the issue came from the way my bridges were
>>> configured, that there was something different with the dom0 primary
>>> interface, etc. Hence I tried all solutions I could find on the
>>> Internet with no success.
>>> I then made a simple test. Instead of binding domU's eth<i> to dom0's
>>> eth<i>, I bound it to dom0's eth<1-i>: I changed
>>> vif = [ 'mac=00:16:3E:55:AF:C2,bridge=eth0',
>>> 'mac=00:16:3E:55:AF:C3,bridge=eth1' ]
>>> to
>>> vif = [ 'mac=00:16:3E:55:AF:C3,bridge=eth1',
>>> 'mac=00:16:3E:55:AF:C2,bridge=eth0' ]
>>> I was very surprised to see that dom0's eth0, domU's eth0 and dom0's
>>> eth1 were all working normally, not domU's eth1. There was no
>>> alternance between dom0's eth0 and domU's eth1 there, probably because
>>> there is always some kind of activity on dom0's eth0 (NFS, monitoring).
>>>
>>> So it seems that my issue is NOT related to the dom0 bridges, but to
>>> the order of the vifs in the domU description. However, in the
>>> xend.log file, there is no difference in the way both vifs are
>>> processed.
>>> [2010-12-16 14:51:27 3241] INFO (XendDomainInfo:1514) createDevice:
>>> vif : {'bridge': 'eth1', 'mac': '00:16:3E:55:AF:C2
>>> ', 'uuid': '9dbf60c7-d785-96e2-b036-dc21b669735c'}
>>> [2010-12-16 14:51:27 3241] DEBUG (DevController:118) DevController:
>>> writing {'mac': '00:16:3E:55:AF:C2', 'handle': '0'
>>> , 'protocol': 'x86_64-abi', 'backend-id': '0', 'state': '1',
>>> 'backend': '/local/domain/0/backend/vif/2/0'} to /local/d
>>> omain/2/device/vif/0.
>>> [2010-12-16 14:51:27 3241] DEBUG (DevController:120) DevController:
>>> writing {'bridge': 'eth1', 'domain': 'inpiftest',
>>> 'handle': '0', 'uuid': '9dbf60c7-d785-96e2-b036-dc21b669735c',
>>> 'script': '/etc/xen/scripts/vif-bridge', 'mac': '00:16:
>>> 3E:55:AF:C2', 'frontend-id': '2', 'state': '1', 'online': '1',
>>> 'frontend': '/local/domain/2/device/vif/0'} to /local/d
>>> omain/0/backend/vif/2/0.
>>> [2010-12-16 14:51:27 3241] INFO (XendDomainInfo:1514) createDevice:
>>> vif : {'bridge': 'eth0', 'mac': '00:16:3E:55:AF:C3
>>> ', 'uuid': '1619a9f8-8113-2e3c-e566-9ca9552a3a93'}
>>> [2010-12-16 14:51:27 3241] DEBUG (DevController:118) DevController:
>>> writing {'mac': '00:16:3E:55:AF:C3', 'handle': '1'
>>> , 'protocol': 'x86_64-abi', 'backend-id': '0', 'state': '1',
>>> 'backend': '/local/domain/0/backend/vif/2/1'} to /local/d
>>> omain/2/device/vif/1.
>>> [2010-12-16 14:51:27 3241] DEBUG (DevController:120) DevController:
>>> writing {'bridge': 'eth0', 'domain': 'inpiftest',
>>> 'handle': '1', 'uuid': '1619a9f8-8113-2e3c-e566-9ca9552a3a93',
>>> 'script': '/etc/xen/scripts/vif-bridge', 'mac': '00:16:
>>> 3E:55:AF:C3', 'frontend-id': '2', 'state': '1', 'online': '1',
>>> 'frontend': '/local/domain/2/device/vif/1'} to /local/d
>>> omain/0/backend/vif/2/1.
>>>
>>> There I am stuck, and it is very frustrating. It looks so simple when
>>> reading at tutos, that I clearly missed something obvious, but what ?
>>> Any clue, any track to follow down will be welcome, truly. Please do
>>> not hesitate to ask me for relevant logs, or for any experiment you
>>> would think useful.
>>>
>>> Thanks for your help,
>>> Philippe.
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> 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
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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 |