Hi Doug,
Just a small note - the commands in the rc.local should be placed *before*
the very last line (the touch ... command).
Thanks in advance,
On Tue, Feb 12, 2019 at 10:56 PM Lev Veyde <lveyde(a)redhat.com> wrote:
Hi Doug,
Thanks, you're welcome!
It's generally possible to add persistent rules by either using the legacy
/etc/rc.d/rc.local boot script (chmod +x /etc/rc.d/rc.local and put the
relevant commands at the end of the file, that way you can actually run any
commands) or by using the /etc/sysconfig/network-scripts/rule-<interface
name> e.g. rule-ovirtmgmt or rule-eno3 (just put in the file "to
172.22.20.31 priority 32764" - without quotes), however of course this
needs to be tested to verify that it works.
I forwarded the issue to the network team and hopefully they will update
soon.
Thanks in advance,
On Tue, Feb 12, 2019 at 10:17 PM Doug Maxfield <Doug.L.Maxfield(a)emcins.com>
wrote:
> Lev,
>
> You have no idea how helpful you have been!!!!!! I’ve been having this
> issue for over 2 months and starting to cause major problems.
>
>
>
> Please let me know if you find a better solution. I’m going to wait to
> hear back from you before implementing.
>
>
>
> If we go with this workaround, is there a way to add the ip rule so it’s
> persistent? I know how to make the ip route add persistent.
>
>
>
> [image: Count On EMC] <
http://www.emcins.com/>
>
> *Doug Maxfield *| Senior Operating Systems Analyst
>
> *EMC Insurance Companies *717 Mulberry St | Des Moines, IA 50265
> Tel: 515.345.4507 | Fax: 866.331.1522
> Doug.L.Maxfield(a)EMCIns.com |
www.emcins.com
>
>
>
>
>
> *From:* Lev Veyde <lveyde(a)redhat.com>
> *Sent:* Tuesday, February 12, 2019 2:14 PM
> *To:* Doug Maxfield <Doug.L.Maxfield(a)EMCIns.com>
> *Cc:* users <users(a)ovirt.org>
> *Subject:* Re: [ovirt-users] Creating a static route
>
>
>
> Hi Doug,
>
> Yes, it looks like it did.
>
> I'll try to catch somebody from my local oVirt/RHV networking team to
> take a look at this issue, maybe there is a better solution for that issue
> than my workaround.
>
>
>
> But meanwhile you can use this workaround (ip route add + ip rule add),
> just please be aware that these should be run after each host reboot, since
> these commands are not persistent.
>
>
>
> Thanks in advance,
>
>
>
> On Tue, Feb 12, 2019 at 10:07 PM Doug Maxfield <
> Doug.L.Maxfield(a)emcins.com> wrote:
>
> Lev,
>
> Here’s the results. It appears to fix the issue!!
>
>
>
> From non-working system:
>
>
>
> -bash-4.2# ip rule add to 172.22.20.31 priority 32764
>
>
>
> -bash-4.2# traceroute 172.22.20.31
>
> traceroute to 172.22.20.31 (172.22.20.31), 30 hops max, 60 byte packets
>
> 1
CenteraAmesAN1.emcins.com (172.21.12.61) 0.487 ms 1.082 ms 1.313 ms
>
> 2 192.168.90.9 (192.168.90.9) 1.507 ms 2.090 ms 2.294 ms
>
> 3
pdputopcomm01.emcins.com (172.22.20.31) 1.403 ms 1.401 ms 1.348 ms
>
>
>
> [image: Count On EMC] <
http://www.emcins.com/>
>
> *Doug Maxfield *| Senior Operating Systems Analyst
>
> *EMC Insurance Companies *717 Mulberry St | Des Moines, IA 50265
> Tel: 515.345.4507 | Fax: 866.331.1522
> Doug.L.Maxfield(a)EMCIns.com |
www.emcins.com
>
>
>
>
>
> *From:* Lev Veyde <lveyde(a)redhat.com>
> *Sent:* Tuesday, February 12, 2019 2:01 PM
> *To:* Doug Maxfield <Doug.L.Maxfield(a)EMCIns.com>
> *Cc:* users <users(a)ovirt.org>
> *Subject:* Re: [ovirt-users] Creating a static route
>
>
>
> Hi Doug,
>
> OK, I think that I have a guess of what may have happened here...
>
> Can you please run the following command on the (non-working) host:
>
> ip rule add to 172.22.20.31 priority 32764
>
>
>
> This needs to be run in addition to the ip route add ... command.
>
>
>
> And then please run the traceroute command and let me know if that fixed
> the issue.
>
>
>
> Thanks in advance,
>
>
>
> On Tue, Feb 12, 2019 at 9:30 PM Doug Maxfield <Doug.L.Maxfield(a)emcins.com>
> wrote:
>
> Lev,
>
> Here you go.
>
>
>
> From non-working system
>
>
>
> -bash-4.2# ip rule
>
> 0: from all lookup local
>
> 32764: from all to 172.21.0.0/16 iif ovirtmgmt lookup 2887058719
>
> 32765: from 172.21.0.0/16 lookup 2887058719
>
> 32766: from all lookup main
>
> 32767: from all lookup default
>
>
>
>
>
> From working system
>
>
>
> [root@paputopcomm04 ~]# ip rule
>
> 0: from all lookup local
>
> 32766: from all lookup main
>
> 32767: from all lookup default
>
>
>
> [image: Count On EMC] <
http://www.emcins.com/>
>
> *Doug Maxfield *| Senior Operating Systems Analyst
>
> *EMC Insurance Companies *717 Mulberry St | Des Moines, IA 50265
> Tel: 515.345.4507 | Fax: 866.331.1522
> Doug.L.Maxfield(a)EMCIns.com |
www.emcins.com
>
>
>
>
>
> *From:* Lev Veyde <lveyde(a)redhat.com>
> *Sent:* Tuesday, February 12, 2019 12:35 PM
> *To:* Doug Maxfield <Doug.L.Maxfield(a)EMCIns.com>
> *Cc:* users <users(a)ovirt.org>
> *Subject:* Re: [ovirt-users] Creating a static route
>
>
>
> Hi Doug,
>
> That shouldn't really matter, since ovirtmgmt is just a bridged
> interface, and unless I'm missing something it shouldn't really affect
> routing.
>
> Can you please also provide the output of "ip rule" from both working and
> non-working hosts ?
>
>
>
> Thanks in advance,
>
>
>
> On Tue, Feb 12, 2019 at 8:01 PM Doug Maxfield <Doug.L.Maxfield(a)emcins.com>
> wrote:
>
> Lev,
>
> Here’s the ip route from the server that worked and didn’t work
>
>
>
> IP Route from server that worked
>
>
>
> [root@paputopcomm04 ~]# ip route
>
> default via 172.21.0.250 dev eno3
>
> 169.254.0.0/16 dev eno3 scope link metric 1002
>
> 169.254.0.0/16 dev eno4 scope link metric 1005
>
> 172.17.0.0/16 dev eno4 proto kernel scope link src 172.17.53.18
>
> 172.21.0.0/16 dev eno3 proto kernel scope link src 172.21.5.34
>
> *172.22.20.31 via 172.21.12.61 dev eno3*
>
> 172.26.0.0/16 dev eno1 proto kernel scope link src 172.26.5.34
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> IP Route from server that didn't work
>
>
>
> -bash-4.2# ip route
>
> default via 172.21.0.250 dev ovirtmgmt
>
> 169.254.0.0/16 dev eno4 scope link metric 1004
>
> 169.254.0.0/16 dev ovirtmgmt scope link metric 1021
>
> 172.17.0.0/16 dev eno4 proto kernel scope link src 172.17.53.15
>
> 172.21.0.0/16 dev ovirtmgmt proto kernel scope link src 172.21.5.31
>
> *172.22.20.31 via 172.21.12.61 dev ovirtmgmt*
>
> 172.26.0.0/16 dev eno1 proto kernel scope link src 172.26.5.31
>
>
>
> We have had our network team look and they don’t know. As I said, the
> was setup by Commvault. It’s almost like the ovirtmgmt interface will not
> allow a route add due to the way it’s configured? They, Commvault, are
> trying different things within their software to get this working, but it’s
> causing us more problems. I figured I would take a shot and see if
> someone, who works with the oVirt software, would have any ideas.
>
>
>
>
>
> [image: Count On EMC] <
http://www.emcins.com/>
>
> *Doug Maxfield *| Senior Operating Systems Analyst
>
> *EMC Insurance Companies *717 Mulberry St | Des Moines, IA 50265
> Tel: 515.345.4507 | Fax: 866.331.1522
> Doug.L.Maxfield(a)EMCIns.com |
www.emcins.com
>
>
>
>
>
> *From:* Lev Veyde <lveyde(a)redhat.com>
> *Sent:* Tuesday, February 12, 2019 11:51 AM
> *To:* Doug Maxfield <Doug.L.Maxfield(a)EMCIns.com>
> *Cc:* users <users(a)ovirt.org>
> *Subject:* Re: [ovirt-users] Creating a static route
>
>
>
> Hi Doug,
>
> This is indeed quite weird...
>
> It looks like the OS for some reason disregards the static route that you
> have added.
>
> BTW, have you verified that it's indeed was added by running "ip
route"
> following the "ip route add ..." command ?
>
> Maybe somebody from the network team has an idea of what may be the cause
> of this issue...
>
>
>
> Thanks in advance,
>
>
>
> On Tue, Feb 12, 2019 at 7:36 PM Doug Maxfield <Doug.L.Maxfield(a)emcins.com>
> wrote:
>
> Lev,
>
> I’m showing you the same outputs (ip a, ip route, traceroute, ip route
> add, and traceroute) from another server in this group that doesn’t use the
> ovirtmgmt for it’s default interface.
>
>
>
> [root@paputopcomm04 ~]# ip a
>
> 1: lo: <LOOPBACK,UP,LOWER_UP> mtu 65536 qdisc noqueue state UNKNOWN qlen 1
>
> 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 forever preferred_lft forever
>
> inet6 ::1/128 scope host
>
> valid_lft forever preferred_lft forever
>
> 2: eno3: <BROADCAST,MULTICAST,UP,LOWER_UP> mtu 1500 qdisc mq state UP
> qlen 1000
>
> link/ether 90:1b:0e:db:bc:c0 brd ff:ff:ff:ff:ff:ff
>
> inet 172.21.5.34/16 brd 172.21.255.255 scope global eno3
>
> valid_lft forever preferred_lft forever
>
> inet6 fe80::921b:eff:fedb:bcc0/64 scope link
>
> valid_lft forever preferred_lft forever
>
> 3: eno1: <BROADCAST,MULTICAST,UP,LOWER_UP> mtu 1500 qdisc mq state UP
> qlen 1000
>
> link/ether 90:1b:0e:e8:da:03 brd ff:ff:ff:ff:ff:ff
>
> inet 172.26.5.34/16 brd 172.26.255.255 scope global eno1
>
> valid_lft forever preferred_lft forever
>
> inet6 fe80::921b:eff:fee8:da03/64 scope link
>
> valid_lft forever preferred_lft forever
>
> 4: eno2: <NO-CARRIER,BROADCAST,MULTICAST,UP> mtu 1500 qdisc mq state DOWN
> qlen 1000
>
> link/ether 90:1b:0e:e8:da:04 brd ff:ff:ff:ff:ff:ff
>
> 5: eno4: <BROADCAST,MULTICAST,UP,LOWER_UP> mtu 1500 qdisc mq state UP
> qlen 1000
>
> link/ether 90:1b:0e:db:bc:c1 brd ff:ff:ff:ff:ff:ff
>
> inet 172.17.53.18/16 brd 172.17.255.255 scope global eno4
>
> valid_lft forever preferred_lft forever
>
> inet6 fe80::921b:eff:fedb:bcc1/64 scope link
>
> valid_lft forever preferred_lft forever
>
> [root@paputopcomm04 ~]#
>
> [root@paputopcomm04 ~]#
>
> [root@paputopcomm04 ~]# ip route
>
> default via 172.21.0.250 dev eno3
>
> 169.254.0.0/16 dev eno3 scope link metric 1002
>
> 169.254.0.0/16 dev eno4 scope link metric 1005
>
> 172.17.0.0/16 dev eno4 proto kernel scope link src 172.17.53.18
>
> 172.21.0.0/16 dev eno3 proto kernel scope link src 172.21.5.34
>
> 172.26.0.0/16 dev eno1 proto kernel scope link src 172.26.5.34
>
> [root@paputopcomm04 ~]#
>
> [root@paputopcomm04 ~]#
>
> [root@paputopcomm04 ~]# traceroute 172.22.20.31
>
> traceroute to 172.22.20.31 (172.22.20.31), 30 hops max, 60 byte packets
>
> 1
ames-acc1-agg-1.emcins.com (172.21.0.246) 1.081 ms 1.816 ms 1.832
> ms
>
> 2 192.168.200.30 (192.168.200.30) 0.639 ms 192.168.200.14
> (192.168.200.14) 1.063 ms 1.577 ms
>
> 3 192.168.200.101 (192.168.200.101) 3.110 ms
ames-sw-wanrtr.emcins.com
> (192.168.200.97) 3.191 ms 3.277 ms
>
> 4 192.168.100.26 (192.168.100.26) 4.146 ms 4.273 ms 4.394 ms
>
> 5 192.168.100.98 (192.168.100.98) 1.893 ms 2.364 ms 2.397 ms
>
> 6 192.168.100.50 (192.168.100.50) 5.707 ms 192.168.100.33
> (192.168.100.33) 5.134 ms 192.168.100.50 (192.168.100.50) 4.105 ms
>
> 7
pdputopcomm01.emcins.com (172.22.20.31) 1.359 ms 1.374 ms 1.351 ms
>
> [root@paputopcomm04 ~]#
>
> [root@paputopcomm04 ~]#
>
> [root@paputopcomm04 ~]#
>
> [root@paputopcomm04 ~]#
>
> [root@paputopcomm04 ~]# ip route add 172.22.20.31 via 172.21.12.61
>
> [root@paputopcomm04 ~]#
>
> [root@paputopcomm04 ~]#
>
> [root@paputopcomm04 ~]#
>
> [root@paputopcomm04 ~]# traceroute 172.22.20.31
>
> traceroute to 172.22.20.31 (172.22.20.31), 30 hops max, 60 byte packets
>
> 1
CenteraAmesAN1.emcins.com (172.21.12.61) 6.184 ms 6.475 ms 6.686 ms
>
> 2 192.168.90.9 (192.168.90.9) 1.770 ms 1.979 ms 2.189 ms
>
> 3
pdputopcomm01.emcins.com (172.22.20.31) 1.405 ms * 1.354 ms
>
>
>
> [image: Count On EMC] <
http://www.emcins.com/>
>
> *Doug Maxfield *| Senior Operating Systems Analyst
>
> *EMC Insurance Companies *717 Mulberry St | Des Moines, IA 50265
> Tel: 515.345.4507 | Fax: 866.331.1522
> Doug.L.Maxfield(a)EMCIns.com |
www.emcins.com
>
>
>
>
>
> *From:* Lev Veyde <lveyde(a)redhat.com>
> *Sent:* Tuesday, February 12, 2019 11:07 AM
> *To:* Doug Maxfield <Doug.L.Maxfield(a)EMCIns.com>
> *Cc:* users <users(a)ovirt.org>
> *Subject:* Re: [ovirt-users] Creating a static route
>
>
>
> Hi Doug,
>
> In most cases it should not be required, especially as my guess (again it
> would be easier if you could post the output of the "ip a" and "ip
route")
> is that the eno1 is part of the ovirtmgmt bridge.
>
> What is the output of the "traceroute 172.22.20.31" that you get on the
> host after you have added the static route?
>
> Thanks in advance,
>
>
>
>
>
> On Tue, Feb 12, 2019 at 6:58 PM Doug Maxfield <Doug.L.Maxfield(a)emcins.com>
> wrote:
>
> Lev,
>
> One other question, since there are multiple enabled interfaces
> (ovirtmgmt and eno1), do I need to specify an interface for the route add.
>
>
>
> [image: Count On EMC] <
http://www.emcins.com/>
>
> *Doug Maxfield *| Senior Operating Systems Analyst
>
> *EMC Insurance Companies *717 Mulberry St | Des Moines, IA 50265
> Tel: 515.345.4507 | Fax: 866.331.1522
> Doug.L.Maxfield(a)EMCIns.com |
www.emcins.com
>
>
>
>
>
> *From:* Lev Veyde <lveyde(a)redhat.com>
> *Sent:* Tuesday, February 12, 2019 10:50 AM
> *To:* Doug Maxfield <Doug.L.Maxfield(a)EMCIns.com>
> *Cc:* users <users(a)ovirt.org>
> *Subject:* Re: [ovirt-users] Creating a static route
>
>
>
> Hi Doug,
>
> What do you mean by "static route is refused"?
>
> What is the error message(s) you see?
>
>
>
> Can you please try to add the route with the following command:
>
> ip route add 172.22.20.31 via 172.21.12.61
>
>
>
> If that doesn't work, then please provide more details, i.e. what is the
> exact error message(s) you see, the version of your OS and oVirt, output of
> "ip a" and "ip route" on your host(s), so that it will be easier
to help
> you.
>
>
>
> Thanks in advance,
>
>
>
> On Tue, Feb 12, 2019 at 6:43 PM Doug Maxfield <Doug.L.Maxfield(a)emcins.com>
> wrote:
>
> Lev,
>
> Thanks for your response.
>
>
>
> If I attempt to manually add the route using route add:
>
>
>
> route add -net 172.22.20.31 netmask 255.255.255.255 gw 172.21.12.61 dev
> ovirtmgmt
>
>
>
> This static route is refused and all traffic is routed over the default
> gateway.
>
>
>
> But if I use a server that doesn’t use the ovirtmgmt interface and set
> the same static route, the required data is routed correctly over that
> static route.
>
>
>
> [image: Count On EMC] <
http://www.emcins.com/>
>
> *Doug Maxfield *| Senior Operating Systems Analyst
>
> *EMC Insurance Companies *717 Mulberry St | Des Moines, IA 50265
> Tel: 515.345.4507 | Fax: 866.331.1522
> Doug.L.Maxfield(a)EMCIns.com |
www.emcins.com
>
>
>
>
>
> *From:* Lev Veyde <lveyde(a)redhat.com>
> *Sent:* Tuesday, February 12, 2019 10:34 AM
> *To:* Doug Maxfield <Doug.L.Maxfield(a)EMCIns.com>
> *Cc:* users <users(a)ovirt.org>
> *Subject:* Re: [ovirt-users] Creating a static route
>
>
>
> Hi Doug,
>
> What is the exact problem you are having while attempting to add a static
> route on the hosts?
>
>
>
> Thanks in advance,
>
>
>
> On Tue, Feb 12, 2019 at 5:23 PM <doug.l.maxfield(a)emcins.com> wrote:
>
> Good Morning,
> New to oVirt. We are using this with a backup solution from Commvault.
> The issue that we are having is that we need to setup a static route for
> specific data between 2 remote sites. The ovirtmgmt is configured with the
> correct IP and gateway for the server. We need to route data over a
> different gateway so that we don't "max out" the default network
connection
> between the 2 sites. Example below
>
> Ovirtmgmt IP - 172.21.5.31
> Gateway IP - 172.21.0.250
>
> We need any traffic with a destination of 172.22.20.31(Remote site) to
> route over this gateway, 172.21.12.61
>
> There are multiple servers in this configuration. Servers that are not
> using the ovirtmgmt interface for their default, we are able to route the
> data. The only problem is with attempting to setup a different static
> route on the ovirtmgmt interfaces.
>
> Thanks in advance for any help!!!
>
> Doug
> _______________________________________________
> Users mailing list -- users(a)ovirt.org
> To unsubscribe send an email to users-leave(a)ovirt.org
> Privacy Statement:
https://www.ovirt.org/site/privacy-policy/
> oVirt Code of Conduct:
>
https://www.ovirt.org/community/about/community-guidelines/
> List Archives:
>
https://lists.ovirt.org/archives/list/users@ovirt.org/message/WGXSLHAP3X5...
>
>
>
> --
>
>
>
> *Lev Veyde*
>
> Software Engineer, RHCE | RHCVA | MCITP
>
> Red Hat Israel
>
> <
https://www.redhat.com>
>
> lev(a)redhat.com | lveyde(a)redhat.com
>
> <
https://red.ht/sig>
>
> *TRIED. TESTED. TRUSTED.* <
https://redhat.com/trusted>
>
>
> NOTICE: This message (including any attachments) is intended for a
> specific individual and may contain information that is either confidential
> or legally protected. If you believe that it has been sent to you in
> error, please reply to the sender that you have received the message in
> error, then delete it. If you are not the intended recipient, you are
> hereby notified that any retention, dissemination, distribution, or copying
> of this communication is strictly prohibited. Thank you. EMC071856
>
>
>
> --
>
>
>
> *Lev Veyde*
>
> Software Engineer, RHCE | RHCVA | MCITP
>
> Red Hat Israel
>
> <
https://www.redhat.com>
>
> lev(a)redhat.com | lveyde(a)redhat.com
>
> <
https://red.ht/sig>
>
> *TRIED. TESTED. TRUSTED.* <
https://redhat.com/trusted>
>
>
>
> --
>
>
>
> *Lev Veyde*
>
> Software Engineer, RHCE | RHCVA | MCITP
>
> Red Hat Israel
>
> <
https://www.redhat.com>
>
> lev(a)redhat.com | lveyde(a)redhat.com
>
> <
https://red.ht/sig>
>
> *TRIED. TESTED. TRUSTED.* <
https://redhat.com/trusted>
>
>
>
> --
>
>
>
> *Lev Veyde*
>
> Software Engineer, RHCE | RHCVA | MCITP
>
> Red Hat Israel
>
> <
https://www.redhat.com>
>
> lev(a)redhat.com | lveyde(a)redhat.com
>
> <
https://red.ht/sig>
>
> *TRIED. TESTED. TRUSTED.* <
https://redhat.com/trusted>
>
>
>
> --
>
>
>
> *Lev Veyde*
>
> Software Engineer, RHCE | RHCVA | MCITP
>
> Red Hat Israel
>
> <
https://www.redhat.com>
>
> lev(a)redhat.com | lveyde(a)redhat.com
>
> <
https://red.ht/sig>
>
> *TRIED. TESTED. TRUSTED.* <
https://redhat.com/trusted>
>
>
>
> --
>
>
>
> *Lev Veyde*
>
> Software Engineer, RHCE | RHCVA | MCITP
>
> Red Hat Israel
>
> <
https://www.redhat.com>
>
> lev(a)redhat.com | lveyde(a)redhat.com
>
> <
https://red.ht/sig>
>
> *TRIED. TESTED. TRUSTED.* <
https://redhat.com/trusted>
>
>
>
> --
>
>
>
> *Lev Veyde*
>
> Software Engineer, RHCE | RHCVA | MCITP
>
> Red Hat Israel
>
> <
https://www.redhat.com>
>
> lev(a)redhat.com | lveyde(a)redhat.com
>
> <
https://red.ht/sig>
>
> *TRIED. TESTED. TRUSTED.* <
https://redhat.com/trusted>
>
--
Lev Veyde
Software Engineer, RHCE | RHCVA | MCITP
Red Hat Israel
<
https://www.redhat.com>
lev(a)redhat.com | lveyde(a)redhat.com
<
https://red.ht/sig>
TRIED. TESTED. TRUSTED. <
https://redhat.com/trusted>
TRIED. TESTED. TRUSTED. <