This is an archived copy of the Xen.org mailing list, which we have preserved to ensure that existing links to archives are not broken. The live archive, which contains the latest emails, can be found at http://lists.xen.org/
Home Products Support Community News


Re: [Xen-devel] DOM0 diskless => NAT doesn't work ?!

To: Bret McKee <bret@xxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [Xen-devel] DOM0 diskless => NAT doesn't work ?!
From: Ian Pratt <Ian.Pratt@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Thu, 08 Apr 2004 18:41:28 +0100
Cc: Ian Pratt <Ian.Pratt@xxxxxxxxxxxx>, xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, Ian.Pratt@xxxxxxxxxxxx
Delivery-date: Thu, 08 Apr 2004 18:51:03 +0100
Envelope-to: steven.hand@xxxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: Your message of "08 Apr 2004 10:49:03 MDT." <1081442943.15733.35.camel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
List-archive: <http://sourceforge.net/mailarchive/forum.php?forum=xen-devel>
List-help: <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.sourceforge.net?subject=help>
List-id: List for Xen developers <xen-devel.lists.sourceforge.net>
List-post: <mailto:xen-devel@lists.sourceforge.net>
List-subscribe: <https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/xen-devel>, <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.sourceforge.net?subject=subscribe>
List-unsubscribe: <https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/xen-devel>, <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.sourceforge.net?subject=unsubscribe>
Sender: xen-devel-admin@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> On Thu, 2004-04-08 at 10:27, Ian Pratt wrote:
> > 169.254/16 addresses are VMM-local: they're never allowed out on
> > the LAN.
> > 
> > For your purposes of accessing an external NFS server use some
> > other subnet e.g. 192.168/16.
> I don't think it is a routing problem, and (despite my long post :-), I
> must have not been clear enough.
> If I boot DOM0 diskfull , and then boot DOM1 diskful or diskless, I can
> ping DOM1 from DOM0 (ping works), but if I boot DOM0
> diskless, and DOM1 either diskless or diskfull, the ping command fails. 

I don't think NAT'ing NFS traffic is going to work -- to my
knowledge Linux iptables hasn't got state-full masquerading for
NFS. It's a bit tricky with all the portmapper and sunrpc

Any reason why you can't just give both dom0 and dom1 LAN-visible
IP addresses?

However, it is odd that you can't ping dom1 even if it is booted

It might be worth trying to back this change out, but I can't see
why it would cause problems:



This SF.Net email is sponsored by: IBM Linux Tutorials
Free Linux tutorial presented by Daniel Robbins, President and CEO of
GenToo technologies. Learn everything from fundamentals to system
Xen-devel mailing list