Hello again -- First off, thank you to everyone who responded to my question regarding the fsck problem we were seeing. You guys were quick and helpful. We now have a working xen Virtual Machine. Which brings me to my secondly...networking is ALMOST working on our VM, but not quite. I''ve looked at several different documents to help with the networking and haven''t had much success. We are wanting to use VMs to use as nameservers, radius servers, dhcp servers, etc., so they have to have an ip address that the world can access. I have tried several things. I thought that adding: nics = 1 dhcp = "off" ip = "x.y.250.200" (where x and y != private address space) netmask = "255.255.255.128" gateway = "x.y.250.129" hostname = "vm03" would make the appropriate magic happen. However, after doing that, I booted our VM and had no interface up at all. I could do ''ifconfig eth0'' and it had no ip information. If I did ''ifconfig eth0 up'', it would come up, but with nothing. ''ifup eth0'' did not work. Going back over the Xen Docs, it said that ''vif = [ '''' ]'' would make the Right Thing(tm) happen, so I added that option, both with and without the other options (ip, gateway, etc) and for some reason my virtual machine is not picking up those options. After that, I created /etc/sysconfig/network with this: NETWORKING=yes HOSTNAME=vm03 GATEWAY=x.y.250.129 and /etc/sysconfig/network-scripts/ifcfg-eth0 with this: DEVICE=eth0 BOOTPROTO=static IPADDR=x.y.250.200 NETMASK=255.255.255.128 ONBOOT=yes TYPE=Ethernet After I added those, I was able to boot up and do ''ifup eth0'' and voila! I had eth0, it had the ip address, and I could ping other devices from my VM!!! So I thought I had a breakthrough. However, there seems to be a couple of issues: 1) Name lookup does not work, from either my Dom0 or VM. 2) I tried to run ''yum update''. First go, because names didn''t resolve, I got a name lookup failure. So, I added the name and ip address to /etc/hosts. After that, I get a ''no route to host'' error. Regarding number 2, I found some information about the ''no route to host'' error on the mailing list. They suggested using the network-route and vif-route scripts as opposed to network-bridge and vif-bridge. I tried that and still had no luck. Our Domain0 is running Centos 4.2, as is our VM. We''re running the latest version of Xen. Thank you for your help! Brian _______________________________________________ Xen-users mailing list Xen-users@lists.xensource.com http://lists.xensource.com/xen-users
On Thu, 2006-03-30 at 15:13 -0500, mbjohn@duke.edu wrote:> I have tried several things. > I thought that adding: > > nics = 1 > dhcp = "off" > ip = "x.y.250.200" (where x and y != private address space) > netmask = "255.255.255.128" > gateway = "x.y.250.129" > hostname = "vm03" > > would make the appropriate magic happen.I have not had much luck configuring domU IP interfaces this way. I prefer to just configure each the domU with a static MAC address (using the 00:16:3e:xx:xx:xx IEEE range assigned to XenSource Inc), configure DHCP service to assign static IP addresses base on the MAC address. Then all you have to do is configure the domU''s network interface using it''s own tools (run "system-config-network" on RHEL/Centos, or "vi /etc/network/interfaces" on debian/ubuntu). DHCP is a standard service for controlling IP addresses. I see no advantage to trying to set them in each domU''s config file, especially since it appears that all this really does is pass the info to the kernel on the boot command line. It''s up to each distribution to correctly interpret the command line parameter, and so far, I''ve only seen it work on Debian Sarge.> 2) I tried to run ''yum update''. First go, because names didn''t resolve, > I got a name lookup failure. So, I added the name and ip address to > /etc/hosts. After that, I get a ''no route to host'' error.It sounds like you have a routing problem. Fix dom0 first. Run ''netstat -rn'', make sure you have a default route and that you can ping the assigned gateway. If it fails, you might have configured the wrong IP address, netmask or gateway IP, or you might have a physical network problem (bad cable). If you can ping the default gateway, then try pinging something beyond that. If that fails, you might need to check that your IP network is being routed properly (check with your local network admin). If you''re using RFC1918 private IP addresses (10.x.x.x, etc), make sure something is doing NAT to hide them. Also, make sure you''ve run ''ethtool -K eth0 tx off'' (on both dom0 and domU), or else it might just be corrupt packets causing your problem. -- Patrick Wolfe (pwolfe@employease.com) _______________________________________________ Xen-users mailing list Xen-users@lists.xensource.com http://lists.xensource.com/xen-users
On Thu, Mar 30, 2006 at 03:13:08PM -0500, mbjohn@duke.edu <mbjohn@duke.edu> wrote a message of 73 lines which said:> I have tried several things. I thought that adding:My personal and limited experience is that configuring IP addresses in /etc/xen configuration files is not reliable.> GATEWAY=x.y.250.129Is the gateway configured? (''route -n'')> 1) Name lookup does not work, from either my Dom0 or VM.What is in /etc/resolv.conf? It should contain ''nameserver x.y.z.t'' where x.y.z.t is obviously a willing nameserver.> After that, I get a ''no route to host'' error.See above for the gateway. Try with ''traceroute -n x.y.z.t'' to see how far you go. _______________________________________________ Xen-users mailing list Xen-users@lists.xensource.com http://lists.xensource.com/xen-users
I had the same problem with my DomU networking - I could ping my nameserver, but not get names. I fixed it using the oft-quoted: ethtook -K eth0 tx off to turn off checksumming. Apparently that''s broken in the current stable xen 3. Once I did that, name resolution worked. On 4/1/06, Stephane Bortzmeyer <stephane@sources.org> wrote:> > On Thu, Mar 30, 2006 at 03:13:08PM -0500, > mbjohn@duke.edu <mbjohn@duke.edu> wrote > a message of 73 lines which said: > > > I have tried several things. I thought that adding: > > My personal and limited experience is that configuring IP addresses > in /etc/xen configuration files is not reliable. > > > GATEWAY=x.y.250.129 > > Is the gateway configured? (''route -n'') > > > 1) Name lookup does not work, from either my Dom0 or VM. > > What is in /etc/resolv.conf? It should contain ''nameserver x.y.z.t'' > where x.y.z.t is obviously a willing nameserver. > > > After that, I get a ''no route to host'' error. > > See above for the gateway. Try with ''traceroute -n x.y.z.t'' to see how > far you go. > > > _______________________________________________ > Xen-users mailing list > Xen-users@lists.xensource.com > http://lists.xensource.com/xen-users >-- Scott ----------------------------- In the beginning, there was nothing, then God said, "Let there be light." And there was light. There was still nothing, but you could see it a lot better. _______________________________________________ Xen-users mailing list Xen-users@lists.xensource.com http://lists.xensource.com/xen-users
On Sun, Apr 02, 2006 at 12:41:26PM -0400, Scott D Hankin <scott.hankin@gmail.com> wrote a message of 108 lines which said:> Apparently that''s broken in the current stable xen 3.Networking works for me on Xen 3 without switching off checksumming. I did not even knew ethtook. _______________________________________________ Xen-users mailing list Xen-users@lists.xensource.com http://lists.xensource.com/xen-users
It seems to be pure virtual networking e.g. where a physical NIC is not involved at all. My example is that I have several machines in a "dmz" on my host that only communicate with other virtual machines. Those machines are not able to talk to each other straight out of the box because of the checksum issue. Ping works, but ping is a special case. So it makes sense when you think about it but something needs a little tweak to better determine when checksum offloading is available and when it isn''t. For now we have a work around (ethtool or the patch). -- Jason The place where you made your stand never mattered, only that you were there... and still on your feet On Sun, 2 Apr 2006, Stephane Bortzmeyer wrote:> On Sun, Apr 02, 2006 at 12:41:26PM -0400, > Scott D Hankin <scott.hankin@gmail.com> wrote > a message of 108 lines which said: > >> Apparently that''s broken in the current stable xen 3. > > Networking works for me on Xen 3 without switching off checksumming. I > did not even knew ethtook. > > _______________________________________________ > Xen-users mailing list > Xen-users@lists.xensource.com > http://lists.xensource.com/xen-users >_______________________________________________ Xen-users mailing list Xen-users@lists.xensource.com http://lists.xensource.com/xen-users