similar to: network-bridge fails to copy from eth0

Hi folks, I read quite some posts about "Destination host unreachable" problems before, but none could help me to solve my issue. So here we go: This is what I am using: SUSE Linux Enterprise Desktop 10 SP1 - Current with all updates Network configuration of my dom0: foobar:~ # ip a 1: lo: <LOOPBACK,UP> mtu 16436 qdisc noqueue link/loopback 00:00:00:00:00:00 brd

Network Configuration issues I''ve been working on this for 2 days PLEASE HELP! I am having the following issues with network configuration and I cannot ping the external interface to begin troubleshooting the network configuration. I know that the ISP''s router is configured correctly since I have attached it to a small Linksys firewall and was able to ping the 66.240.207.226

Finaly, i was waiting for this one. ;-) Now after all changes Rowland suggested. Run this : getfacl /home/users Show the output. There are 5 things you need to think in. 1) The folder rights 2) The share rights 3) Posix or windows ACL's? ( use Windows ACL's my advice. ) 4) Dont forget the "Primary Group". 5) If you use chmod, you must re-apply the windows ACL again on

Package: xen-hypervisor-4.0-amd64 Version: 4.0.1-4 Severity: normal Xen Networking[1] works by creating a new pair of virtual ethernet interfaces (vifN.M in dom0 and ethM in domU with id N) and connecting then by an internal "crossover ethernet cable". My understanding of the "internal crossover" thing is that networking statistics should be the same no matter if you measure

Hi, this is propably bridge related and not really a xen problem, but it might help someone: Some of our domUs are not able to arp. Arp -n show (incomplete), and doing a tcpdump shows, that on the dom0''s eth0 the arp request goes out, the response comes in, but on the vifX.0 interface the arp response is gone. dom0# tcpdump -ni eth0 arp who-has 10.32.2.51 tell 10.32.7.70 arp reply

> >>>> Who are you logged into the Windows PC as ? > >>> I log in az A\Administrator. I created an admin user, put in Domain > >>> Admins group, but the result was the same (ok, it would be strange, if > >>> it would work with it, instead of Administrator) > >> Then you need to ensure that 'Domain Admins' has the same privilege as

hello , i''m currently trying to set-up Traffic Shapping with Shorewall and I have strong feelings that I found a bug. I may be mistaken, but I tried everything and can''t get it to work. I''ve turned ON TC_ENABLED=Yes and CLEAR_TC=Yes when i start shorewall ( shorewall start ), i get this message : Setting up Traffic Control Rules... TC Rule "2 eth1 0.0.0.0/0 tcp

Hi Parke, Thanks, no I had not run those commands, but after doing so, my VPN address is not visible. See below: nsasia at db2:/etc/tinc$ sudo systemctl enable tinc at VPN1 Created symlink /etc/systemd/system/tinc.service.wants/tinc at VPN1.service → /lib/ systemd/system/tinc at .service. nsasia at db2:/etc/tinc$ systemctl start tinc at VPN1 ==== AUTHENTICATING FOR

Has anyone ran into this issue before? 2 physical nics: eth0 hooked up to 10.175.8.0/21 eth1 hooked up to 10.150.8.0/24 Ifconfig -a looks like this: [root@mgixen1 ~]# ifconfig -a eth0 Link encap:Ethernet HWaddr 00:19:B9:F2:1B:C3 inet addr:10.175.8.158 Bcast:10.175.15.255 Mask:255.255.248.0 inet6 addr: fe80::219:b9ff:fef2:1bc3/64 Scope:Link UP

> > On the file serever: > > Collected config --- 2019-07-03-10:27 ----------- > > > > Hostname: srv > > DNS Domain: a.b.hu > > FQDN: srv.a.b.hu > > ipaddress: 10.0.3.15 192.168.0.8 > > ----------- > > Samba is running as a Unix domain member > > ----------- > > > > This computer is running Debian 10.0 x86_64 > >

Package: xen-utils-3.0.3-1 Version: 3.0.3-0-2 Severity: important After installing Xen and setting up (network-script 'network-bridge netdev=eth0') I no longer have a sane IPv6 address in the dom0: inet6 2001:700:300:d03f:fcff:ffff:feff:ffff/64 scope global dynamic valid_lft 2591977sec preferred_lft 604777sec This is probably since xenbr0 has a MAC address of fe:ff:ff:ff:ff:ff;

I have nic bonding (mode=802.3ad) setup on 2 servers, both running Centos 5.5 In the "Active Aggregator Info", on one reports 4 ports - which is correct - but the other only reports 3 ports. It's always eth0 that shows a different aggregator ID. Changing the cables around so it hits a different port on the switch makes no difference. The switch is correctly configured for the port

Can someone provide some guidance with my server, I have a fairly new centos 8 server, pretty much just a KVM host but I have noticed that its dumping and rebooting at various times. Journalctl does not go back past the reboot so I am unable to catch what may be causing it, it appears to be KVM from /var/log/messages and it appears I should have a kernel dump file but I am unable to find it. I

> Dear CentOS-Community, > > we are facing the following issue: > > A secondary ip address seems to be automatically added to a nic which > causes several issues in our setup. Hi, Can you show as the config of eno4? And can you diff the config of eno1 and eno4. Looks like there is a difference somewhere. Regards, Simon > > > This server is equipped with four nics

I should have what i want to achive. The server is intended as a host for VMs. Our network has multiple VLANs, and the VMs will be connected to different VLANS. The interface eno1 is for host traffic and eno2 is connected to the trunk port of the switch, making the different VLANS availabel to the VMs via the br0. I want to use a VLAN-aware br0, so that I specify in my VM config (on the host

someone recommended that i should give br0 the same hardware address as eno2. I did that, and restarted the vm, and it still does not work. Here is my current host interface config: ip a 1: lo: <LOOPBACK,UP,LOWER_UP> mtu 65536 qdisc noqueue state UNKNOWN group default qlen 1000 link/loopback 00:00:00:00:00:00 brd 00:00:00:00:00:00 inet 127.0.0.1/8 scope host lo valid_lft

I have nic bonding (mode=802.3ad) setup on 2 servers, both running Centos 5.5 In the "Active Aggregator Info", on one reports 4 ports - which is correct - but the other only reports 3 ports. It''s always eth0 that shows a different aggregator ID. Changing the cables around so it hits a different port on the switch makes no difference. The switch is correctly configured for the

Hello All, I'm trying to figure out why xen-utils-common 3.2 doesn't suport bridging on multiple interfaces. I've been digging around /etc/xen/scripts/network-bridges. And modified it so that during boot, when executed the script writes into /tmp/netbr file, but I commented out code that actually creates bridges. I discovered that this script is called three times during boot, I

I have an access-IProm my isp that I configured my eth0 with. And I also have an IP-range assigned from my ISP that will be used on my servers connected to eth1. The IP-range is routed thru the access-IP. This is how my configfiles look like. Internal everything seems to work but not external. /etc/shorewall/proxyarp #ADDRESS INTERFACE EXTERNAL HAVEROUTE

Hi All, If I have a vlan-Id on an interface with an ipv6 address, then I am unable to ping a real router. The problem is that the Neighbour Solicitation originated from the Centos machine is missing the Vlan-Id in the packet. Therefore a real router will drop such a packet. I have tried this with Centos 4.7 and with Centos 5.5 with the same result. If I originate the first Neighbour