| |
|
 |
|
 |
|
|
|
| |
|
|
xen-users
RE: [Xen-users] bridge-utils problem
Hi,
It seems that I didn't set bridging correctly.
I was trying to create DomU using the bridge. However, it failed.
I add something like "vif = [ 'bridge=xenbr0' ]" to the DomU configuration file.
When I create the domain, it said
Error: Device 0 (vif) could not be connected. Hotplug scripts not working.
Error: Domain 'sample-xen-domain' does not exist.
I have checked other posts but didn't get the solutions.
Also, I don't know that why I don't have the interface vif0.0 and peth0.
I type ifconfig -a but none of them are listed.
Here is the output of "network-bridge status"
2: eth0: mtu 1500 qdisc pfifo_fast qlen 1000
link/ether 00:30:48:63:72:76 brd ff:ff:ff:ff:ff:ff
inet6 fe80::230:48ff:fe63:7276/64 scope link
valid_lft forever preferred_lft forever
4: xenbr0: mtu 1500 qdisc noqueue
link/ether 00:30:48:63:72:76 brd ff:ff:ff:ff:ff:ff
inet 143.215.206.12/22 brd 143.215.207.255 scope global xenbr0
inet6 fe80::200:ff:fe00:0/64 scope link
valid_lft forever preferred_lft forever
bridge name bridge id STP enabled interfaces
xenbr0 8000.003048637276 no eth0
143.215.204.0/22 dev xenbr0 proto kernel scope link src 143.215.206.12
127.0.0.0/8 dev lo scope link
default via 143.215.204.1 dev xenbr0
Kernel IP routing table
Destination Gateway Genmask Flags Metric Ref Use Iface
143.215.204.0 0.0.0.0 255.255.252.0 U 0 0 0 xenbr0
127.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 255.0.0.0 U 0 0 0 lo
0.0.0.0 143.215.204.1 0.0.0.0 UG 0 0 0 xenbr0
And my ifconfig output:
eth0 Link encap:Ethernet HWaddr 00:30:48:63:72:76
inet6 addr: fe80::230:48ff:fe63:7276/64 Scope:Link
UP BROADCAST RUNNING MULTICAST MTU:1500 Metric:1
RX packets:63643 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 frame:0
TX packets:53819 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 carrier:0
collisions:0 txqueuelen:1000
RX bytes:7907265 (7.5 Mb) TX bytes:46213243 (44.0 Mb)
Base address:0x2000 Memory:d8020000-d8040000
lo Link encap:Local Loopback
inet addr:127.0.0.1 Mask:255.0.0.0
inet6 addr: ::1/128 Scope:Host
UP LOOPBACK RUNNING MTU:16436 Metric:1
RX packets:191997 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 frame:0
TX packets:191997 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 carrier:0
collisions:0 txqueuelen:0
RX bytes:240379493 (229.2 Mb) TX bytes:240379493 (229.2 Mb)
xenbr0 Link encap:Ethernet HWaddr 00:30:48:63:72:76
inet addr:143.215.206.12 Bcast:143.215.207.255 Mask:255.255.252.0
inet6 addr: fe80::200:ff:fe00:0/64 Scope:Link
UP BROADCAST RUNNING MULTICAST MTU:1500 Metric:1
RX packets:63516 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 frame:0
TX packets:33764 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 carrier:0
collisions:0 txqueuelen:0
RX bytes:6692348 (6.3 Mb) TX bytes:44836115 (42.7 Mb)
Any response is appreciated. Thanks.
Regards,
- Tommy
----------------------------------------
> From: tommy24@xxxxxxxx
> To: stefan.bauer@xxxxxxxxxxx; xen-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: RE: [Xen-users] bridge-utils problem
> Date: Mon, 22 Sep 2008 11:22:48 -0700
> CC:
>
>
> Hi,
>
> Thanks for all your suggestions.
> Finally I found the problem that the interface xenbr0 cannot get the IP
> automatically.
> Here is the procedure that I did:
>
> #since dhcpcd starts when eth0 is running, I shut down it.
> kill [pid of dhcpcd]
> ifconfig eth0 0.0.0.0
> dhclient xenbr0
>
> Without shutdown the dhcpcd which has been run by eth0, dhclient cannot get
> the IP for xenbr0.
> But I still don't know why this would happen. Did I miss setting anything?
> I follow the procedure of the following website which provides solutions in
> general cases (not XEN).
> http://www.linuxfoundation.org/en/Net:Bridge
> I am still wondering what is the right procedure to set IP for xenbr0 while
> fetching IP from DHCP?
> Any response is appreciated. Thanks in advance.
>
> Regards,
> - Tommy
>
> ----------------------------------------
>> Date: Mon, 22 Sep 2008 19:51:36 +0200
>> From: stefan.bauer@xxxxxxxxxxx
>> To: xen-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>> Subject: Re: [Xen-users] bridge-utils problem
>>
>> * Tommy Huang [22.09.2008 19:15]:
>>> I found that once I "ifdown xenbr0". Then the machine can connect to the
>>> Internet immediately.
>>> By the way, I allow all traffic in iptables. So the firewall should not be
>>> problem now.
>>> Any thought? Thanks in advance.
>>
>> That sounds like a routing problem. Probably more than one default route
>> is active. That can be confirmed by doing a route -n while xenbr0 is up.
>> there should only be one entry beginning with 0.0.0.0.
>>
>> Regards
>>
>> --
>> stefan
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Xen-users mailing list
>> Xen-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>> http://lists.xensource.com/xen-users
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> Stay up to date on your PC, the Web, and your mobile phone with Windows Live.
> http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/msnnkwxp1020093185mrt/direct/01/
> _______________________________________________
> Xen-users mailing list
> Xen-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> http://lists.xensource.com/xen-users
_________________________________________________________________
Want to do more with Windows Live? Learn “10 hidden secrets” from Jamie.
http://windowslive.com/connect/post/jamiethomson.spaces.live.com-Blog-cns!550F681DAD532637!5295.entry?ocid=TXT_TAGLM_WL_domore_092008
_______________________________________________
Xen-users mailing list
Xen-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-users
|
|
|
| |
|
Home