Please look at this does this look OK?
guest# ifconfig -a
eth0 Link encap:Ethernet HWaddr AA:00:00:0C:0E:D9
inet addr:172.16.100.1 Bcast:172.16.255.255 Mask:255.255.0.0
UP BROADCAST RUNNING MULTICAST MTU:1500 Metric:1
RX packets:0 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 frame:0
TX packets:0 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 carrier:0
collisions:0 txqueuelen:1000
RX bytes:0 (0.0 B) TX bytes:0 (0.0 B)
domain0# ifconfig -a
eth0 Link encap:Ethernet HWaddr 00:08:54:08:3E:C7
inet addr:w.x.y.z Bcast:255.255.255.255 Mask:255.255.254.0
UP BROADCAST NOTRAILERS RUNNING MULTICAST MTU:1500 Metric:1
RX packets:131747 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 frame:0
TX packets:12223 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 carrier:0
collisions:0 txqueuelen:1000
RX bytes:15796392 (15.0 Mb) TX bytes:1114824 (1.0 Mb)
Interrupt:9 Base address:0xd000
vif10.0 Link encap:Ethernet HWaddr FE:FF:FF:FF:FF:FF
UP BROADCAST RUNNING MULTICAST MTU:1500 Metric:1
RX packets:0 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 frame:0
TX packets:3345 errors:0 dropped:34 overruns:0 carrier:0
collisions:0 txqueuelen:0
RX bytes:0 (0.0 b) TX bytes:200784 (196.0 Kb)
xen-br0 Link encap:Ethernet HWaddr 00:08:54:08:3E:C7
inet addr:w.x.y.z Bcast:255.255.255.255 Mask:255.255.255.255
UP BROADCAST RUNNING MULTICAST MTU:1500 Metric:1
RX packets:131569 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 frame:0
TX packets:12221 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 carrier:0
collisions:0 txqueuelen:0
RX bytes:13934617 (13.2 Mb) TX bytes:1100770 (1.0 Mb)
The vif interface in domain0 is not initialised correctly, right?
-------------------------------------------------------
The SF.Net email is sponsored by: Beat the post-holiday blues
Get a FREE limited edition SourceForge.net t-shirt from ThinkGeek.
It''s fun and FREE -- well, almost....http://www.thinkgeek.com/sfshirt
_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/xen-devel
> Please look at this does this look OK?It''s OK. Because you''re using an L2 ethernet bridge, it''s not necessary to set up any address details for the vif in domain0. Does it work? HTH, Mark> guest# ifconfig -a > eth0 Link encap:Ethernet HWaddr AA:00:00:0C:0E:D9 > inet addr:172.16.100.1 Bcast:172.16.255.255 Mask:255.255.0.0 > UP BROADCAST RUNNING MULTICAST MTU:1500 Metric:1 > RX packets:0 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 frame:0 > TX packets:0 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 carrier:0 > collisions:0 txqueuelen:1000 > RX bytes:0 (0.0 B) TX bytes:0 (0.0 B) > > domain0# ifconfig -a > eth0 Link encap:Ethernet HWaddr 00:08:54:08:3E:C7 > inet addr:w.x.y.z Bcast:255.255.255.255 Mask:255.255.254.0 > UP BROADCAST NOTRAILERS RUNNING MULTICAST MTU:1500 Metric:1 > RX packets:131747 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 frame:0 > TX packets:12223 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 carrier:0 > collisions:0 txqueuelen:1000 > RX bytes:15796392 (15.0 Mb) TX bytes:1114824 (1.0 Mb) > Interrupt:9 Base address:0xd000 > > vif10.0 Link encap:Ethernet HWaddr FE:FF:FF:FF:FF:FF > UP BROADCAST RUNNING MULTICAST MTU:1500 Metric:1 > RX packets:0 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 frame:0 > TX packets:3345 errors:0 dropped:34 overruns:0 carrier:0 > collisions:0 txqueuelen:0 > RX bytes:0 (0.0 b) TX bytes:200784 (196.0 Kb) > > xen-br0 Link encap:Ethernet HWaddr 00:08:54:08:3E:C7 > inet addr:w.x.y.z Bcast:255.255.255.255 Mask:255.255.255.255 > UP BROADCAST RUNNING MULTICAST MTU:1500 Metric:1 > RX packets:131569 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 frame:0 > TX packets:12221 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 carrier:0 > collisions:0 txqueuelen:0 > RX bytes:13934617 (13.2 Mb) TX bytes:1100770 (1.0 Mb) > > The vif interface in domain0 is not initialised correctly, right? > > > ------------------------------------------------------- > The SF.Net email is sponsored by: Beat the post-holiday blues > Get a FREE limited edition SourceForge.net t-shirt from ThinkGeek. > It''s fun and FREE -- well, almost....http://www.thinkgeek.com/sfshirt > _______________________________________________ > Xen-devel mailing list > Xen-devel@lists.sourceforge.net > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/xen-devel------------------------------------------------------- The SF.Net email is sponsored by: Beat the post-holiday blues Get a FREE limited edition SourceForge.net t-shirt from ThinkGeek. It''s fun and FREE -- well, almost....http://www.thinkgeek.com/sfshirt _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/xen-devel
Mark Williamson wrote:> It''s OK. Because you''re using an L2 ethernet bridge, it''s not necessary to > set up any address details for the vif in domain0.I doubt it does, since the IP address is still bound to both xen-br0 and eth0; this will break things. That''s something that really needs to be fixed in the network config script, because networking won''t work right until that''s corrected. -- Derrik Pates demon@devrandom.net ------------------------------------------------------- The SF.Net email is sponsored by: Beat the post-holiday blues Get a FREE limited edition SourceForge.net t-shirt from ThinkGeek. It''s fun and FREE -- well, almost....http://www.thinkgeek.com/sfshirt _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/xen-devel
> Mark Williamson wrote: >> It''s OK. Because you''re using an L2 ethernet bridge, it''s not necessary to >> set up any address details for the vif in domain0. > > I doubt it does, since the IP address is still bound to both xen-br0 and > eth0; this will break things. That''s something that really needs to be fixed > in the network config script, because networking won''t work right until > that''s corrected.I would agree here. In my experience you must clear eth0 first. something like /sbin/ifconfig eth0 0.0.0.0 up ------------------------------------------------------- The SF.Net email is sponsored by: Beat the post-holiday blues Get a FREE limited edition SourceForge.net t-shirt from ThinkGeek. It''s fun and FREE -- well, almost....http://www.thinkgeek.com/sfshirt _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/xen-devel
On Fri, 14 Jan 2005, Adam Sulmicki wrote:> /sbin/ifconfig eth0 0.0.0.0 upAm I the only person who sees this as a tad odd? I can''t escape thinking about a real bridge. Seems to me each eth or vif you add to a bridge should retain its IP and the bridge, basically being a device that does mac-layer routing, has no IP. I guess this is an artifact of how it is implemented? ron ------------------------------------------------------- The SF.Net email is sponsored by: Beat the post-holiday blues Get a FREE limited edition SourceForge.net t-shirt from ThinkGeek. It''s fun and FREE -- well, almost....http://www.thinkgeek.com/sfshirt _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/xen-devel
Ronald G. Minnich wrote:> Am I the only person who sees this as a tad odd? I can''t escape thinking > about a real bridge. Seems to me each eth or vif you add to a bridge > should retain its IP and the bridge, basically being a device that does > mac-layer routing, has no IP.No, because the IP(s) assigned to a device cause the device to only accept packets destinde for it; when the IP is 0.0.0.0, the interface goes into promiscuous mode, and so it accepts all packets, whether destined for it or not. Then, the bridge device enslaves all the interfaces, and transports the packets among the participant interfaces.> I guess this is an artifact of how it is implemented?You could say that. -- Derrik Pates demon@devrandom.net ------------------------------------------------------- The SF.Net email is sponsored by: Beat the post-holiday blues Get a FREE limited edition SourceForge.net t-shirt from ThinkGeek. It''s fun and FREE -- well, almost....http://www.thinkgeek.com/sfshirt _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/xen-devel
Derrik Pates wrote:> Ronald G. Minnich wrote: > >> Am I the only person who sees this as a tad odd? I can''t escape >> thinking about a real bridge. Seems to me each eth or vif you add to a >> bridge should retain its IP and the bridge, basically being a device >> that does mac-layer routing, has no IP. > > > No, because the IP(s) assigned to a device cause the device to only > accept packets destinde for it; when the IP is 0.0.0.0, the interface > goes into promiscuous mode, and so it accepts all packets, whether > destined for it or not. Then, the bridge device enslaves all the > interfaces, and transports the packets among the participant interfaces.Isn''t promisciuous mode L2 based? If you do `ifconfig eth0 promisc`, it''ll pass all packets, even those having foreign destination MAC address, to upper layers, AFAIK. -jkt -- cd /local/pub && more beer > /dev/mouth ------------------------------------------------------- The SF.Net email is sponsored by: Beat the post-holiday blues Get a FREE limited edition SourceForge.net t-shirt from ThinkGeek. It''s fun and FREE -- well, almost....http://www.thinkgeek.com/sfshirt _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/xen-devel
On 15 Jan 2005, at 04:40, Ronald G. Minnich wrote:> On Fri, 14 Jan 2005, Adam Sulmicki wrote: > >> /sbin/ifconfig eth0 0.0.0.0 up > > Am I the only person who sees this as a tad odd? I can''t escape > thinking > about a real bridge. Seems to me each eth or vif you add to a bridge > should retain its IP and the bridge, basically being a device that does > mac-layer routing, has no IP. > > I guess this is an artifact of how it is implemented?In my xen-unstable configuration, neither xen-br0 nor vif have any IP addresses. BTW, xen-br0 is linked to eth1, which is also up but with no configured IP. ------------------------------------------------------- The SF.Net email is sponsored by: Beat the post-holiday blues Get a FREE limited edition SourceForge.net t-shirt from ThinkGeek. It''s fun and FREE -- well, almost....http://www.thinkgeek.com/sfshirt _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/xen-devel
On Fri, Jan 14, 2005 at 08:40:08PM -0700, Ronald G. Minnich wrote:> On Fri, 14 Jan 2005, Adam Sulmicki wrote: > > /sbin/ifconfig eth0 0.0.0.0 up > > Am I the only person who sees this as a tad odd? I can''t escape thinking > about a real bridge. Seems to me each eth or vif you add to a bridge > should retain its IP and the bridge, basically being a device that does > mac-layer routing, has no IP.Actually, if you think about it, it makes complete sense. I really can''t imagine a switch where each port has it''s own IP address. The switch itself having an IP address on the other hand is perfectly reasonable, as in the case of a managed switch.> I guess this is an artifact of how it is implemented?I think it''d be wierd if it worked any other way, taking the above into account. J -- Jody Belka knew (at) pimb (dot) org ------------------------------------------------------- The SF.Net email is sponsored by: Beat the post-holiday blues Get a FREE limited edition SourceForge.net t-shirt from ThinkGeek. It''s fun and FREE -- well, almost....http://www.thinkgeek.com/sfshirt _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/xen-devel
On Sat, Jan 15, 2005 at 05:20:56PM +0100, Jody Belka wrote:> Actually, if you think about it, it makes complete sense. I really can''t > imagine a switch where each port has it''s own IP address. The switch itselfYes, exactly. Switching is at a level below IP - indeed, switches work fine with non-IP packets.> having an IP address on the other hand is perfectly reasonable, as in the > case of a managed switch.Which is, from a protocol point of view, not an address that''s actually "the switch" - it''s the address of this entirely separate device that happens to be in the same box of hardware with the switch and has some backside connection to the switch that''s entirely separate from the network. That the switch and the management unit may share some of the same hardware, however intimately, is just an implementation detail. :-) -- The reason [limited term of copyright is] important is this: Publishers are in the business of expanding capital. The writers who supply them are in the business of expanding civilization itself. -- John Bloom ------------------------------------------------------- The SF.Net email is sponsored by: Beat the post-holiday blues Get a FREE limited edition SourceForge.net t-shirt from ThinkGeek. It''s fun and FREE -- well, almost....http://www.thinkgeek.com/sfshirt _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/xen-devel
Jody Belka wrote:> On Fri, Jan 14, 2005 at 08:40:08PM -0700, Ronald G. Minnich wrote: > >>On Fri, 14 Jan 2005, Adam Sulmicki wrote: >> >>> /sbin/ifconfig eth0 0.0.0.0 up >> >>Am I the only person who sees this as a tad odd? I can''t escape thinking >>about a real bridge. Seems to me each eth or vif you add to a bridge >>should retain its IP and the bridge, basically being a device that does >>mac-layer routing, has no IP. > > > Actually, if you think about it, it makes complete sense. I really can''t > imagine a switch where each port has it''s own IP address. The switch itself > having an IP address on the other hand is perfectly reasonable, as in the > case of a managed switch. > > >>I guess this is an artifact of how it is implemented? > > > I think it''d be wierd if it worked any other way, taking the above into account. > > > J >Check the linux bridge howto at http://bridge.sourceforge.net/howto.html This site also has pointers to other info. There''s really nothing special about the xen-br0 bridge, it''s just a normal linux bridge. Mike ------------------------------------------------------- The SF.Net email is sponsored by: Beat the post-holiday blues Get a FREE limited edition SourceForge.net t-shirt from ThinkGeek. It''s fun and FREE -- well, almost....http://www.thinkgeek.com/sfshirt _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/xen-devel