similar to: Bonding wired and wireless ifaces

On 04/30/2016 01:26 PM, wwp wrote: > I'm wondering if there's any interest in trying to bond em1 and eth0 > (respectively wired and wireless interfaces here), and if any, how to > do it in CentOS6. You might be able to round-robin your outgoing packets, but without support on the upstream switch, you won't improve your inbound bandwidth. Unless your bandwidth needs are

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

CentOS 6.2......... Why do the physical interfaces report (correctly) that they're negotiated at 1000Mb/s, but when I `cat /proc/net/bonding/bond0` I get 100Mbps for the member interfaces, and when I ` mii-tool bond0` I get 10Mbps for the bond? ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ethtool em1 Settings for em1: Supported ports: [

Hello everyone I am running into some strange issues when configuring networking interfaces on my physical server running Centos 7.5. Let me give you an overview of what's going on: We have a physical server, running CentOS 7.5. This server has one 4 port NIC and one 2 port NIC and a Dell IDRAC port. The first port of the 4 port NIC, em1, is used for Management traffic. The first port of

Hi, I need to locate a Asterisk server and a PoE-enabled switch on someone's desk. I've seen this Netgear ProSafe FS108P with 4 10/100 and 4 10/100 w/PoE ports silent enough ? Any recommendation ? Regards -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://lists.digium.com/pipermail/asterisk-users/attachments/20090123/4f76aef9/attachment.htm

Pardon, this might be off-topic. I'm reading: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Network_switch For a setup of ~5 agents, would I be wrong in thinking that a generic 16 port unmanaged switch would fit the bill? The first model to come up for me in an Amazon search is: http://support.netgear.com/product/fs116 Is this a reasonable choice? Would I be wrong in thinking that most any Fast

Hello list, I am doing some work for a non profit group. As part of this, I am going to be putting in a 30 handset Asterisk solution. We are trying to keep the costs down as much as possible, as this job includes cabling, I am looking at POE solutions. On the switch side, I am considering something like some Netgear ProSafe FS726TP 24 port switches, or maybe the equivalent Linksys SRW224MP 24

I'm observing double the amount of "recv" bytes in latest Centos v6.8 with ixgbe 4.2.1-k. Anybody seeing the same? $ ethtool -i em1 driver: ixgbe version: 4.2.1-k $ uname -an Linux chndcdmid01.rd.ph.cox.net 2.6.32-642.4.2.el6.x86_64 #1 SMP Tue Aug 23 19:58:13 UTC 2016 x86_64 x86_64 x86_64 GNU/Linux Doing comparison on 2 days at same hour just to show the difference. This is an

Shorewall 4.5.15 3 Interface setup em1 p3p1 p4p4 ppp0 Hi, Since changing to NetworkManger on Fedora 18 I can no longer connect to the DSL Modem, which is connected to Interface em1. When the NetworkManger brings up the interfaces and ppp0, it no longer assigns an IP to em1. If I have ppp0 disabled and NetworkManger brings up the interfaces, em1 gets an IP of 192.168.1.2. Then when I get

I am running NOX controller with a python script that prints out the destination mac and the source mac for each packet arriving at the now controller and then floods it out. So here's what happening: With em1 connected, all the packets that arrive at em1 are coming to the controller and printing out the details. However, without em1 connected to the OVS, when I have the following setup:

Hey, I have KVM installed on my Fedora 17 box. I added the network interfaces of the virtual machines to the openvswitch bridge as follows: ____ ____ / VM1\______br0_______/ em1\ \____/ | \____/ | _|_ /VM2\ \____/ virbr0 is the virtual network switch VM1 and VM2 are on the same subnet having tap interfaces vnet0 and vnet1 respectively. em1 is the default

Ok, I''ve completely reinstalled Xen and I am still encountering the most curious problem. I set up a virtual network of eight domains: three are on a virtual DMZ network (10.0.1.0/24), four are on a virtual internal network (10.0.2.0/24), and a router connects the two. All the domains can ping each other and traceroute-ing between them shows the proper network structure (first hop:

Once upon a time, Lists <lists at benjamindsmith.com> said: > I understand that it's possible to allow the 4 VM guest systems to each have a > "direct" fixed IP address and access the addresses \via the host network > adapter, while the host retains its fixed IP. If you are running NetworkManager (the default), it's not too hard. Here's an example

Since RHV 3.6.10, the default network name is 'ovirtmgmt' instead of 'rhvm'. This is just a documentation change. --- p2v/virt-p2v.pod | 10 +++++----- v2v/cmdline.ml | 2 +- v2v/virt-v2v.pod | 12 ++++++------ 3 files changed, 12 insertions(+), 12 deletions(-) diff --git a/p2v/virt-p2v.pod b/p2v/virt-p2v.pod index ea685be..4a5f587 100644 --- a/p2v/virt-p2v.pod +++

Hi, I am using opensuse as my dome and I tried to make a NIC card work in PCI passthrough. pciback is installed as a module in this kernel. I unbound all the NIC''s from dom0 driver and bound them to PCI back. I then modified the domU config file to include the pci device. When the system started booting up, I NICs were recognized however they failed to attach. This is the message I got,

Is it possible to pass PPTP packets through 2 firewalls before they hit the remote access server? I installed a Netgear ProSafe VPN firewall as the first line of defense in my network. I have since set up a Fedora Core 2 server running Shorewall 2.1.3 and Squid in non-transparent mode, between the Netgear unit and my network. So, the Netgear faces the Internet with a public, static, IP address.

We just got DELL R920 and installed Centos 6.5 on it.? After installation, network not function.? We manually enter IP address, gateway and netmark on "em1".? we also do following: 1. startup NetworkManager 2. /etc/sysconfig/network-scripts/ifcfg-em1? ==> NM_CONTROOLED=yes I tried to startup network and get error message: Bring up interface em1: connection activation failed

Hi, after upgrading to 7.6, kernel 3.10.0-957.1.3.el7.x86_64, at boot instead of the GUI login screen I got two lines like this: IPv6: ADDRCONF(NETDEV_UP): em1: link is not ready IPv6: ADDRCONF(NETDEV_UP): em1: link is not ready The server is accessible via ssh on IPv4 Server: DELL PowerEdge T 110 II NIC: Broadcom, driver tg3, lspci -v: 04:00.0 Ethernet controller: Broadcom Inc. and

hi everyone I'm having a bit of a puzzle on one centos system, I have four interfaces: nm-team1 10.5.6.100 em1 192.168.2.17 em2 192.168.2.18 p3p3 172.25.12.222 I do: ping 10.5.6.17 -I em1 PING 10.5.6.17 (10.5.6.17) from 192.168.2.17 em1: 56(84) bytes of data. 64 bytes from 10.5.6.17: icmp_seq=1 ttl=64 time=0.367 ms the same for -I em2, for -I em1 and naturally for -I nm-team1 - all good.

Hello all, Basically my problem is how can i access a virtual machine from local network. I am able to do so from the host PC put not from other PC's on the same network. here is my what i did so far (http://wiki.libvirt.org/page/Networking#NAT_forwarding_.28aka_.22virtual_networks.22.29) cat '/etc/libvirt/qemu/networks/default.xml' <network>