similar to: Configuring eth1 to be in promiscuous mode

I''ve been using Puppet now for a month or so and I''ve come to a problem that may warrant an additional Puppet metaparameter. I''m advocating the addition of a metaparameter called "preaction" (or something like that), which will perform some arbitrary action before the resource is modified. There may be a way to do this within Puppet already (with some

Hi, I hope someone can help me, I cannot seem to get a system's ethernet interface to correctly work in promiscuous mode... I have a Centos 6.4 system with 2 bnx2 interfaces on it. I have set up eth1 in promiscuous mode and am sending traffic to it using the port mirroring configuration on a Nortel 3510-24T switch. The switch reports that it is sending a fair amount of traffic to the

Hi all, Someone played with kickstart bonding with centos 6.4 ? CentOS 6.4, as upstream now support ifcae bonding in kickstart network section. I've an issue with configuring a second bonding iface in kicstart on CentOS 6.4. The first bonding (bond0) works as espected but the second is not configured during installation. I've a 6 nic server (two for "puclic" network, two for

Dear Centos-Virt: This is actually a second request for help on the same issue. I finally got to try what several months ago was replayed to me and no joy was to be had. I am afraid the original thread got stale and also had extra, unnecessary data in it. Guest=XP Pro, SP2 Host=CentOS5; # uname -r; 2.6.18-8.1.15.el5 VirtualBox-1.5.0_24069_rhel5-2.i586.rpm

Hello All, I seem to have run into a bug with the new --bridgeslaves=<INTERFACE> option. It would seem that if I tell the bridge device to use a virtual interface (like bond0) rather than a physical interface (em1/em2) that kickstart completely barfs on it. I have provided my network section below which works fine as long as i don't enable all the bridge content. When the

> Date: Monday, October 03, 2016 22:00:07 -0400 > From: TE Dukes <tdukes at palmettoshopper.com> > >> From: Gordon Messmer >> Sent: Monday, October 3, 2016 4:25 PM >> >> On 10/03/2016 04:54 AM, TE Dukes wrote: >> > I can get the guest to access the internet but have tried every >> > was possible to be able to access the guest from the LAN

Dear Centos-Virt: Help! Guest=XP Pro, SP2 Host=CentOS5; # uname -r; 2.6.18-8.1.8.el5 VirtualBox-1.4.0_21864_rhel5-1.i586 http://www.virtualbox.org/download/1.5.0/VirtualBox-1.5.0_24069_rhel5-1.i586.rpm.run I have two nic: eth0 is the internal network; eth1 connects to a DSL modem. I also have a fully functioning DHCP server on eth0 (works perfectly with Parallels for Linux). The directions

Hi, I'm kickstarting a vm in ESXi 5.1. ks.cfg is on floppy, install media is ISO file. This works great as long as I don't add an additional repo, in our case it is vmware tools on one of our webservers. If I add the repo line, anaconda asks then for the used network card and indeed, switching to console the interfaces are still unconfigured. Chosing eth0 in gui continues the

took a couple months off due to road blocks, hoping a fresh look would allow me to use my server as desired. I have three ports, eth0-2 over two nics. I want to bond them, and then use a bridge to connect to virtual machines on the virtual host computer. Never having done this, I am confused on some parts. Here is where I am at now and any pointers helpful. Single server, centos 6.x My issue

Hi, I've created a bridge using 2 interfaces and have a lot of messages as follows: nov 12 15:30:22 localhost kernel: br0: received packet on enp0s3 with own address as source address nov 12 15:30:22 localhost kernel: br0: received packet on enp0s3 with own address as source address And the operating systems is extremely slow Interfaces files : [root at localhost ~]# cat

Hi all, Read many posts on the subject. Using 802.3ad. Few problems; Cannot ping some hosts on the network, they are all up. Cannot resolve via DNS which is one of the hosts that I cannot ping, internal nor external DNS hosts. Unplugging the NICS and plugging them back in will then not allow pining if the default d=gateway. When cold booting it somewhat works, some hosts are pingable while

I have a server located remotely running CentOS 5.x. I need to have two IP's on the same interface. So I have this: /etc/sysconfig/network-scripts/ifcfg-eth0 DEVICE=eth0 BOOTPROTO=none BROADCAST=69.x.x.199 HWADDR=00:x:x:x:c6:10 IPADDR=69.x.x.194 NETMASK=255.255.255.248 NETWORK=69.x.x.192 ONBOOT=yes GATEWAY=69.x.x.193 TYPE=Ethernet So I added this:

hello all, I have been trying to set-up bridged network with VLAN and not able to succeed as many tutorials address only single NIC. I am trying to setup 2 guests (backtrack instance) each guest has NIC1 and NIC2. following is snippet for guest1 I am not able to get 192.168.0.2 address back on guest eth0. VIRT-MANAGER GUI : guest1-lan details radio button left side panel NIC1

We just went to replace the bridge/firewall services one one server with the same on another. It's pretty simple, and I literally cloned (w/ rsync) a third server that does this onto the one that will be the new one. Then copied the /etc/sysconfig/iptables from the one being replaced, and brought it up this morning. Nope. We had to put everything back the way it was. The new one sees the two

I have CentOS 4 running on an old (early model) p3 with 64 MB RAM. It is acting as a router and firewall for my LAN. CentOS is doing a really good job with Shorewall + DHCPd - on a 10 Mbps cable modem, I see ~ 9.7 Mbps of throughput even when numerous tcp streams to different LAN hosts are running. I would like to add a virtual interface to one of my LAN interfaces. My LAN interface

2015-11-12 18:07 GMT-03:00 James A. Peltier <jpeltier at sfu.ca>: > ----- Original Message ----- > | Hi, > | > | I've created a bridge using 2 interfaces and have a lot of messages as > | follows: > | > | nov 12 15:30:22 localhost kernel: br0: received packet on enp0s3 with own > | address as source address > | nov 12 15:30:22 localhost kernel: br0: received

Setting up bonding in active-backup mode 1 (using ARP monitoring) on a server, it looked OK, but pulling the active link cable didn't actually work, it didn't fail over. Eventually with manual playing around with modprobe, ifconfig, ifenslave, etc., a solution was stumbled upon: enslave the eth1 device before eth0, and all is good. Why this should matter is a puzzle - I could not find

Hi! I just upgraded a machine to 7.7.1908 and the default route is not being set on boot. This particular server has a bonded interface, and the corresponding configuration for the master is ( /etc/sysconfig/network-scripts/ifcfg-bond0): TYPE=Bond BOOTPROTO=none DEFROUTE=yes IPV4_FAILURE_FATAL=yes NAME=bond0 DEVICE=bond0 ONBOOT=yes IPADDR=10.3.20.131 PREFIX=24

I'm running into a situation where a bogus bonded interface named "bond0" is being created, in addition to the desired "bond2" interface. Can anyone confirm this? Anyone know why it's happening or what I do to get rid of it? I wanted to start my numbering scheme at 2 instead of 0, which I didn't think would be a problem. As you can see, I have no reference

Hello, I'm running a CentOS 5.6 server through linode. I am atempting to configure it for ipv6, previously this had been done though not by me on a ubuntu box so the hardware can take it. I've got an ipv6 tunnel through Hurricane Electric and at a shell prompt have done the following: ifconfig sit0 up ifconfig sit0 inet6 tunnel ::IPV4 Address ifconfig sit1 up ifconfig sit1 inet6 add IPV6