Re: [Users] vlan interface failed : Bridged network Internet is attached to multiple interfaces: <UNKNOWN> on Host node1.

They pushed a change to initscripts and systemd that should fix the issue: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2013-1590/initscripts-9.42... ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Jeff Bailey" <bailey(a)cs.kent.edu&gt; > To: users(a)ovirt.org > Sent: Wednesday, February 20, 2013 11:26:33 AM > Subject: Re: [Users] vlan interface failed : Bridged network Internet is attached to multiple interfaces: <UNKNOWN> > on Host node1. > > > On 2/20/2013 4:56 AM, Antoni Segura Puimedon wrote: > > There's a systemd hackfest this week on occasion of the developers > > conference in Brno. I'll try to see what can be done about this. > > > > @Kevin. Did you try the 60-net.rules that Lukas Nykryn proposed? > > ACTION=="add", SUBSYSTEM=="net", ATTRS{type}=="1", > > PROGRAM="/lib/udev/rename_device", RESULT=="?*", NAME="$result" > > I had tried this and it didn't help. It seems that the vlan > interface > has type 1 (/sys/class/net/em1_1.538/type contains 1) and the rename > still happens. > > > Best, > > > > Toni > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > >> From: "Jeff Bailey" <bailey(a)cs.kent.edu&gt; > >> To: users(a)ovirt.org > >> Sent: Wednesday, February 20, 2013 3:38:28 AM > >> Subject: Re: [Users] vlan interface failed : Bridged network > >> Internet is attached to multiple interfaces: <UNKNOWN> > >> on Host node1. > >> > >> On 2/19/2013 8:04 PM, Jeff Bailey wrote: > >>> On 2/19/2013 5:34 PM, Dan Kenigsberg wrote: > >>>> On Tue, Feb 19, 2013 at 11:12:42PM +0100, Kevin Maziere Aubry > >>>> wrote: > >>>>> Hi > >>>>> > >>>>> I've just found a workaround ... rm > >>>>> /usr/lib/udev/rules.d/60-net.rules and > >>>>> reboot > >>>>> Then I can add vlan to physical interface. > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> 2013/2/19 Kevin Maziere Aubry <kevin.maziere(a)alterway.fr&gt; > >>>>> > >>>>>> Hi > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Today on IRC we worked on this issue and I will try to > >>>>>> summarized the > >>>>>> results of our troubleshooting : > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Current stable systemd rpm has a bug with device mapper which > >>>>>> cause > >>>>>> all > >>>>>> device created on a fibrechannel to have wrong access right. > >>>>>> So the workaround is to replace systemd with the one on the > >>>>>> testing > >>>>>> repo. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> But the testing release as also a bug with udev which rename > >>>>>> network > >>>>>> interface so that each new network interface is named > >>>>>> renameX@interface. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> We test some udev workaround unsucessfully. ( > >>>>>> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=907365 ) > >>>>>> Now I think a patch on systemd testing rpm should fix the > >>>>>> issue, > >>>>>> waiting > >>>>>> for it > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Reference: > >>>>>> > >>>>>> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=912323 > >>>> Last word that I've heard about this bug ^^^ ("Bug 912323 - > >>>> Adding > >>>> a > >>>> VLAN Device does not Work ") is that Muli can no longer > >>>> reproduce > >>>> it on > >>>> his host. > >>>> > >>>> If this does reproduce on your system, would you provide more > >>>> data > >>>> as > >>>> requested on > >>>> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=912323#c2 > >>>> ? > >>>> Note that I've just called the systemd cavalry to our > >>>> assistance. > >>> I thought I had a simple (if inconvenient) work around but it > >>> looks > >>> like something (either the deploy or syncing the management > >>> network) > >>> puts the HWADDR line back in ifcfg-em1_1. I'm going to do some > >>> more > >>> testing... Yep, it's the network sync that adds HWADDR back > >>> which > >>> then triggers udev to rename em1_1.538 to em1_1 which doesn't > >>> work > >>> and > >>> I end up with "rename??@em1_1". I can live without the sync I > >>> suppose. I'll try leaving the manual config of the management > >>> network > >>> alone and then config the other networks and see what happens. > >>> > >> Well, that didn't work. I can't seem to find any combination that > >> plays > >> nicely together. Looks like Kevin's solution of ripping out > >> udev's > >> ability to rename interfaces may be the only quick fix. It does > >> get > >> us > >> the ability to change ownership of LVs back which is more > >> important. > >> So > >> far, I've seen no ill effects and everything (networking and > >> storage) > >> seems to be working as it should. > >> > >>>> Dan. > >>>> _______________________________________________ > >>>> Users mailing list > >>>> Users(a)ovirt.org > >>>> http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/users > >>> _______________________________________________ > >>> Users mailing list > >>> Users(a)ovirt.org > >>> http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/users > >> _______________________________________________ > >> Users mailing list > >> Users(a)ovirt.org > >> http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/users > >> > > _______________________________________________ > > Users mailing list > > Users(a)ovirt.org > > http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/users > > _______________________________________________ > Users mailing list > Users(a)ovirt.org > http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/users > _______________________________________________ Users mailing list Users(a)ovirt.org http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/users