Re: [Xen-users] mount DomU root fs via. NFS

[Jeenu Viswambharan <Jeenu.Viswambharan@xxxxxxx>]

On Fri, Aug 01, 2014 at 09:45:45, Jeenu Viswambharan wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 31, 2014 at 09:53:32, xen-users-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
> > On Wed, 2014-07-30 at 18:03 +0100, Jeenu Viswambharan wrote:
> > >  I therefore instead chose to go with NAT instead.
> > >
> > > From [1], all that's to be done in Dom0 is to
> > >
> > >   echo 1 > /proc/sys/net/ipv4/ip_forward
> >
> > [1] also says you need to do
> >         iptables -t nat -A POSTROUTING -o eth0 -j MASQUERADE
> > to enable NAT, otherwise you are just in regular routing mode.
> >
> > If you don't do that then you would have to arrange a subnet for
> > your VMs and appropriate routing tables in your external
> > infrastructure etc.
>
> Uh, my init script was doing that too; I missed to mention it earlier.
>
> The behaviour is reproducible - guest waits for the NFS mount and
> crashes. All I see in Dom0 dmesg pertaining to virtual interfaces is:
>
>   [  262.676269] IPv6: ADDRCONF(NETDEV_UP): vif1.0: link is not ready
>   [  272.153571] IPv6: ADDRCONF(NETDEV_CHANGE): vif1.0: link becomes ready
>
> I also have a virtual interface in Dom0 while the guest is alive:
>
>   vif1.0  Link encap:Ethernet  HWaddr fe:ff:ff:ff:ff:ff
>           inet addr:192.168.1.128  Bcast:0.0.0.0  Mask:255.255.255.255
>           inet6 addr: fe80::fcff:ffff:feff:ffff/64 Scope:Link
>           UP BROADCAST RUNNING MULTICAST  MTU:1500  Metric:1
>           RX packets:0 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 frame:0
>           TX packets:6 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 carrier:0
>           collisions:0 txqueuelen:32
>           RX bytes:0 (0.0 B)  TX bytes:468 (468.0 B)
>
> If I'm reading this right, there were 6 packets received from the
> guest.  How do we know what happened to these?
>
> FWIW, `iptables -t nat -L` is:
>
>   Chain PREROUTING (policy ACCEPT)
>   target     prot opt source               destination
>
>   Chain INPUT (policy ACCEPT)
>   target     prot opt source               destination
>
>   Chain OUTPUT (policy ACCEPT)
>   target     prot opt source               destination
>
>   Chain POSTROUTING (policy ACCEPT)
>   target     prot opt source               destination
>   MASQUERADE  all  --  anywhere             anywhere
>
> Anything suspicious here?

I tried routing as well, and the behaviour is same. The only
modifications was to change script=vif-route in the guest configuration
file; and additionally write 1 to
/proc/sys/net/ipv4/conf/eth0/proxy_arp.

--
Jeenu

-- IMPORTANT NOTICE: The contents of this email and any attachments are 
confidential and may also be privileged. If you are not the intended recipient, 
please notify the sender immediately and do not disclose the contents to any 
other person, use it for any purpose, or store or copy the information in any 
medium.  Thank you.

ARM Limited, Registered office 110 Fulbourn Road, Cambridge CB1 9NJ, Registered 
in England & Wales, Company No:  2557590
ARM Holdings plc, Registered office 110 Fulbourn Road, Cambridge CB1 9NJ, 
Registered in England & Wales, Company No:  2548782


_______________________________________________
Xen-users mailing list
Xen-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xen.org/xen-users