similar to: Inconsistent iptables forwarding rules for virtual networks?

Hi all, I have 3 guests (2-RHEL4 and 1 RHEL6) and have some issues regarding networking between them. The 2 RHEL4 system's use default bridge virbr0 and get ip's of range 192.168.122.0/24 (192.168.122.207, 192.168.122.167) I created another bridge (virbr1) with NAT forwarding (no dhcp). The network i choose was 192.168.100.0/24. And the third system (RHEL6) was assigned static ip-addres

Hi. I have a machine with a local DHCP server and a couple of virtual networks and I've configured the server for each virtual interface, so that I would be able to install VMs on the corresponding subnets using PXE. The problem is that the two DHCP servers (my local server and dnsmasq) are conflicting with each other causing the boot process to either fails or takes ages untill a VM can

Hello, I came across an interesting problem in my home lab a few weeks ago as I'm prepping for my RHCE exam using Michael Jang study guide. I've been at this for days now, and I still can't wrap my head around how two or more virtual networks in default NAT configuration are even allowed to communicate with each other despite what the libvirt documentation said. Here's the

On Tue, Jun 20, 2017 at 10:05:19AM +0200, Martin Kletzander wrote: >On Tue, Jun 20, 2017 at 02:26:59AM -0400, Travis S. Johnson wrote: >>Hello, >> >>I came across an interesting problem in my home lab a few weeks ago as I'm >>prepping for my RHCE exam using Michael Jang study guide. I've been at this >>for days now, and I still can't wrap my head around

I used to run many VMs on my Ubuntu 10.04 box. However, after upgrading to Ubuntu 12.10 (and thus, libvirt 0.9.13), The VMs can't be recognized anymore. Nothing appears in the output of 'virsh list --all', nor in virt-manager. When I created a new VM based on a disk image of one of the not-recognized-any-more VMs, a new schema file has been auto-generated, and the new VM now is

>Sorry, have to correct myself. Had to much to do today on OpenShift. >There is no Docker involved in what we discuss. The firewall rules for >the host bridge devices get created by libvirtd. Thanks I was using iptables and not converted to firewalld. I am doing so now. Will I need to delete the VM and re-add it ? I am rebooting first. Jerry

OK I rebooted. I changed the NIC from Bridge to Passthrough, hit apply, then changed it to bridge and hit apply, then booted the VM. My firewall looks better but still not working. iptables -L FORWARD -v -n | egrep '(policy|virbr1)' Chain FORWARD (policy ACCEPT 0 packets, 0 bytes) 0 0 ACCEPT all -- eth0 virbr1 0.0.0.0/0 192.168.100.0/24 ctstate RELATED,ESTABLISHED

On Tue, Jun 20, 2017 at 02:26:59AM -0400, Travis S. Johnson wrote: >Hello, > >I came across an interesting problem in my home lab a few weeks ago as I'm >prepping for my RHCE exam using Michael Jang study guide. I've been at this >for days now, and I still can't wrap my head around how two or more virtual >networks in default NAT configuration are even allowed to

Hello all, I’m currently trying to figure out how to forward ports to guests that are on a NAT Network. I have followed the directions on https://wiki.libvirt.org/page/Networking under the “Forwarding Incoming Connections” Section and get connection refused when attempting to connect. System: Ubuntu Server 18.04.1 Virsh / LibVirtd Version: 4.0.0 Here’s the contents of /etc/libvirt/hooks/qemu  

On 06/20/2017 05:27 AM, Martin Kletzander wrote: > On Tue, Jun 20, 2017 at 10:05:19AM +0200, Martin Kletzander wrote: >> On Tue, Jun 20, 2017 at 02:26:59AM -0400, Travis S. Johnson wrote: >>> Hello, >>> >>> I came across an interesting problem in my home lab a few weeks ago >>> as I'm >>> prepping for my RHCE exam using Michael Jang study

Hello, I have first a question (and then may be a problem), that I have difficulties to understand and eventually to investigate. On each of my guests VM, I see constantly a RX dropped number increasing , Even if the VM does nothing ! ifconfig eth0: flags=4163<UP,BROADCAST,RUNNING,MULTICAST> mtu 1500 inet 192.168.100.15 netmask 255.255.255.0 broadcast 192.168.100.255

I have these interfaces listed. eth0: flags=4163<UP,BROADCAST,RUNNING,MULTICAST> mtu 1500 inet 192.168.1.8 netmask 255.255.252.0 broadcast 192.168.3.255 inet6 fe80::e2d5:5eff:fe63:abe5 prefixlen 64 scopeid 0x20<link> ether e0:d5:5e:63:ab:e5 txqueuelen 1000 (Ethernet) RX packets 42411243 bytes 4701898681 (4.3 GiB) RX errors 0 dropped 156

I have CentOS 7 host. Two guests on bridge network setup by GUI and virt-manager. 1 CentOS 8 guest 1 Win 10 guest Both cannot access the host. They can other machines on the network. Guests can access the internet just not the host. I used virt-manager GUi to set up everything. Selected the eth0:macvtap and Bridge. I "desire" bridge network. If I select something else I get access to

At work I have a script that provisions a vm for use by employees. One step in this process is to fetch hadoop, which we happen to get from cloudera. I noticed the script always failed when I used libvirt's default networking (nat) but worked fine when I used user mode networking. My instinct is that this is related to (potentially uncommon) network traffic from the server in question, and

Hello, Finally I managed to get a xen 4.0 working on ubuntu 10.04 with pvops kernel and libvirt. However I am having some problems with networking... after initial installation with netinstall image in hvm mode, when I transform the vm in xen pv (via pygrub with the current ubuntu kernel), networking startEd to act weird... Basically I''m not using a network script from xen. I define a

Hello, Finally I managed to get a xen 4.0 working on ubuntu 10.04 with pvops kernel and libvirt. However I am having some problems with networking... after initial installation with netinstall image in hvm mode, when I transform the vm in xen pv (via pygrub with the current ubuntu kernel), networking startEd to act weird... Basically I''m not using a network script from xen. I define a

Hello, I'm a little confused on which networking option I need to choose when setting up a VM. I set up two VMs this past weekend both with NAT. Both able to were access the internet. The first one, I created in my / file system but didn't really have the space so I deleted it. The second one, I created in /home/kvm, but deleted it as well when I couldn't access it FROM the

I'm looking for some information regarding the interaction of KVM, VLANs, firewalld, and the kernel's forwarding configuration. I would appreciate input especially from anyone already running a similar configuration in production. In short, I'm trying to figure out if a current configuration is inadvertently opening up traffic across network segments. On earlier versions of CentOS

Thanks for the info. brctl show virbr0 bridge name bridge id STP enabled interfaces virbr0 8000.525400fc34af yes virbr0-nic brctl show virbr1 bridge name bridge id STP enabled interfaces virbr1 8000.5254009c3902 yes virbr1-nic ip a s virbr0 3: virbr0: <NO-CARRIER,BROADCAST,MULTICAST,UP> mtu

Am 01.04.2020 um 21:56 schrieb Jerry Geis: > Thanks for the info. > > brctl show virbr0 > bridge name bridge id STP enabled interfaces > virbr0 8000.525400fc34af yes virbr0-nic > > brctl show virbr1 > bridge name bridge id STP enabled interfaces > virbr1 8000.5254009c3902 yes