Hi list,
I have a problem with using bonding, with vlans and bridging. I'm trying
to create the following situation:
Network overview:
+------+
+--------+ |blade |
| |-----|switch| eth0 +------+
| | | |------| |
| | +------+ | |
| switch | | host |
| | +------+ | |
| | |blade |------| |
| |-----|switch| eth1 +------+
+--------+ | |
+------+
Situation on the host:
+----+
|eth0|------+
+----+ |
+-----+ +---------+ +-----+
|bond0|---|bond0.101|---|br101|
+-----+ +---------+ +-----+
+----+ |
|eth1|------+
+----+
Now, as soon as the bridge comes up I get the error 'bond0.101: received
packet with own address as source address'. This happens every time I
start a new sessioen to a host. Sniffing with tcpdump and wireshark on
br101 show all arp packets 2 times. I cannot figure out why this is
happening. When I create this situation without the bridge I do not get
duplicate traffic, so it's not coming from the network.
My config is:
auto bond0
iface bond0 inet manual
slaves eth0 eth1
bond_primary eth0
bond_mode active-backup
bond_miimon 100
auto bond0.101
iface bond0.101 inet manual
auto br0
iface br0 inet static
bridge_ports bond0.101
bridge_stp off
address 192.168.1.25
netmask 255.255.255.0
gateway 192.168.1.1
I've tried this with the stock Debian Lenny kernel (2.6.26) and 2.6.32. Am
I doing something wrong here?
Greets,
Sander Klein
Sander Klein schrieb:> Hi list, > > I have a problem with using bonding, with vlans and bridging. I'm trying > to create the following situation: > > Network overview: > > +------+ > +--------+ |blade | > | |-----|switch| eth0 +------+ > | | | |------| | > | | +------+ | | > | switch | | host | > | | +------+ | | > | | |blade |------| | > | |-----|switch| eth1 +------+ > +--------+ | | > +------+ > > Situation on the host: > > +----+ > |eth0|------+ > +----+ | > +-----+ +---------+ +-----+ > |bond0|---|bond0.101|---|br101| > +-----+ +---------+ +-----+ > +----+ | > |eth1|------+ > +----+ > > > Now, as soon as the bridge comes up I get the error 'bond0.101: received > packet with own address as source address'. This happens every time I > start a new sessioen to a host. Sniffing with tcpdump and wireshark on > br101 show all arp packets 2 times. I cannot figure out why this is > happening. When I create this situation without the bridge I do not get > duplicate traffic, so it's not coming from the network. >i dont think that you can do with bonding what you want, because you just connected them to a switch you can only bond interface together which are bonded on the opposite site too so your local eth0 and eth1 is bonded and the remote site input must be bonded too. a switch cannot bond, a switch only switches, so it outputs the same packets on all ethernet connectors so remote: local bond0 --- eth0 ------------- eth0 --- bond0 | ---- eth1 ------------- eth1 --- | i hope you understand what i mean. so bond0 is the local usable interface on each site which splits the traffic on 2 ethernet interfaces depending on your bonding algorithm. a switch only duplicates packets> My config is: > > auto bond0 > iface bond0 inet manual > slaves eth0 eth1 > bond_primary eth0 > bond_mode active-backup > bond_miimon 100 > > auto bond0.101 > iface bond0.101 inet manual > > auto br0 > iface br0 inet static > bridge_ports bond0.101 > bridge_stp off > address 192.168.1.25 > netmask 255.255.255.0 > gateway 192.168.1.1 > > I've tried this with the stock Debian Lenny kernel (2.6.26) and 2.6.32. Am > I doing something wrong here? > > Greets, > > Sander Klein > > _______________________________________________ > Bridge mailing list > Bridge at lists.linux-foundation.org > https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bridge > >-- Mit freundlichen Gr?ssen / Regards Sebastian Gottschall / CTO NewMedia-NET GmbH - DD-WRT Firmensitz: Wormser Stra?e 5 - 7, 64625 Bensheim Registergericht: Amtsgericht Darmstadt, HRB 25473 Gesch?ftsf?hrer: Peter Steinh?user, Christian Scheele http://www.dd-wrt.com email: s.gottschall at dd-wrt.com Tel.: +496251-582650 / Fax: +496251-5826565
Sander Klein wrote :> Hi list, > > I have a problem with using bonding, with vlans and bridging. I'm trying > to create the following situation:Can you please also describe what you try to achieve, and not only your setup ? What are the expected effects ? Your bonding setup (active-backup) will lead to one port enabled and one disabled. Why don't you simply use eth0.101 and eth1.101 as two ports of br101, and enable stp ? Enabling stp would achieve the same result : one port in forwarding state and one in the blocked state. Nicolas.> Network overview: > > +------+ > +--------+ |blade | > | |-----|switch| eth0 +------+ > | | | |------| | > | | +------+ | | > | switch | | host | > | | +------+ | | > | | |blade |------| | > | |-----|switch| eth1 +------+ > +--------+ | | > +------+ > > Situation on the host: > > +----+ > |eth0|------+ > +----+ | > +-----+ +---------+ +-----+ > |bond0|---|bond0.101|---|br101| > +-----+ +---------+ +-----+ > +----+ | > |eth1|------+ > +----+ > > > Now, as soon as the bridge comes up I get the error 'bond0.101: received > packet with own address as source address'. This happens every time I > start a new sessioen to a host. Sniffing with tcpdump and wireshark on > br101 show all arp packets 2 times. I cannot figure out why this is > happening. When I create this situation without the bridge I do not get > duplicate traffic, so it's not coming from the network. > > My config is: > > auto bond0 > iface bond0 inet manual > slaves eth0 eth1 > bond_primary eth0 > bond_mode active-backup > bond_miimon 100 > > auto bond0.101 > iface bond0.101 inet manual > > auto br0 > iface br0 inet static > bridge_ports bond0.101 > bridge_stp off > address 192.168.1.25 > netmask 255.255.255.0 > gateway 192.168.1.1 > > I've tried this with the stock Debian Lenny kernel (2.6.26) and 2.6.32. Am > I doing something wrong here? > > Greets, > > Sander Klein > > _______________________________________________ > Bridge mailing list > Bridge at lists.linux-foundation.org > https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bridge >
On Sat, Dec 5, 2009 at 10:30 AM, Sander Klein <roedie at roedie.nl> wrote:> Hi list, > > I have a problem with using bonding, with vlans and bridging. I'm trying > to create the following situation: > > Network overview: > > ? ? ? ? ? ? ? +------+ > +--------+ ? ? |blade | > | ? ? ? ?|-----|switch| eth0 +------+ > | ? ? ? ?| ? ? | ? ? ?|------| ? ? ?| > | ? ? ? ?| ? ? +------+ ? ? ?| ? ? ?| > | switch | ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? | host | > | ? ? ? ?| ? ? +------+ ? ? ?| ? ? ?| > | ? ? ? ?| ? ? |blade |------| ? ? ?| > | ? ? ? ?|-----|switch| eth1 +------+ > +--------+ ? ? | ? ? ?| > ? ? ? ? ? ? ? +------+ > > Situation on the host: > > +----+ > |eth0|------+ > +----+ ? ? ?| > ? ? ? ? +-----+ ? +---------+ ? +-----+ > ? ? ? ? |bond0|---|bond0.101|---|br101| > ? ? ? ? +-----+ ? +---------+ ? +-----+ > +----+ ? ? ?| > |eth1|------+ > +----+ > > > Now, as soon as the bridge comes up I get the error 'bond0.101: received > packet with ?own address as source address'. This happens every time I > start a new sessioen to a host. Sniffing with tcpdump and wireshark on > br101 show all arp packets 2 times. I cannot figure out why this is > happening. When I create this situation without the bridge I do not get > duplicate traffic, so it's not coming from the network.I have something very similar. That message is a warning, not an error, and over a year of experience suggests that it can be safely ignored. (my actual setup is a firewall without enough ports to directly connect all attached networks -- the switch tags traffic with the particular port it arrives on and passes it to a trunk port, the linux box is connected to two such trunk ports in the active-backup bonding mode, and bridges all the VLANs together forcing the traffic through iptables/ebtables. I don't think the warning occurs in this part of the configuration. There's also a traffic shaper appliance with a history of unreliability between the firewall and the main internet gateway, stp is used to prefer to send traffic through the traffic shaper, but activate a direct link whenever the shaper fails. On this second bridge I encounter the same warning you do, but not for arp traffic, only stp pdus which are periodically sent to check whether the shaper appliance is ok. I guess the issue is that the shaper appliance passes pdus through unchanged, if it were doing stp processing then the pdus incoming to the linux box would not have the linux box's other vlan port as sender and not trigger the warning.) Are any of your VLANs transparently bridged together elsewhere in the network? When you see the arp packet twice in wireshark, is it in the same VLAN both times? I believe you can also use some of the logging actions in iptables to list which physical port (of the bonding members) a particular packet arrived on.> > My config is: > > auto bond0 > iface bond0 inet manual > ? ? ? ?slaves eth0 eth1 > ? ? ? ?bond_primary eth0 > ? ? ? ?bond_mode active-backup > ? ? ? ?bond_miimon 100 > > auto bond0.101 > iface bond0.101 inet manual > > auto br0 > iface br0 inet static > ? ? ? ?bridge_ports bond0.101 > ? ? ? ?bridge_stp off > ? ? ? ?address 192.168.1.25 > ? ? ? ?netmask 255.255.255.0 > ? ? ? ?gateway 192.168.1.1 > > I've tried this with the stock Debian Lenny kernel (2.6.26) and 2.6.32. Am > I doing something wrong here? > > Greets, > > Sander Klein > > _______________________________________________ > Bridge mailing list > Bridge at lists.linux-foundation.org > https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bridge >