Hi, I have modified my VM network to have multiple tagged networks. It used to be an untagged network and it worked fine, but I needed to add more networks on the host. The switch it is connected to has the port configured as a trunk port with these VLANs. When a VM sends traffic out (to get a DHCP address for instance), it reaches the server but does not get the DHCP offer that the server sends. I did a tcpdump on the node that hosts the VM and the packets going out do not have a VLAN tag. I assume the VM host interface would should not have the tag present, but that the p2p1.91 interface should put the VLAN tag on. The relevant interface configuration on the node that the VM host is on looks like: 27: sohonet_DMZ: <BROADCAST,MULTICAST,UP,LOWER_UP> mtu 1500 qdisc noqueue state UP link/ether a0:36:9f:2a:63:20 brd ff:ff:ff:ff:ff:ff 29: p2p1.91@p2p1: <BROADCAST,MULTICAST,UP,LOWER_UP> mtu 1500 qdisc noqueue master vmnet state UP link/ether a0:36:9f:2a:63:20 brd ff:ff:ff:ff:ff:ff 30: vmnet: <BROADCAST,MULTICAST,UP,LOWER_UP> mtu 1500 qdisc noqueue state UP link/ether a0:36:9f:2a:63:20 brd ff:ff:ff:ff:ff:ff inet6 fe80::a236:9fff:fe2a:6320/64 scope link valid_lft forever preferred_lft forever 31: vnet0: <BROADCAST,MULTICAST,UP,LOWER_UP> mtu 1500 qdisc pfifo_fast master vmnet state UNKNOWN qlen 500 link/ether fe:1a:4a:16:01:58 brd ff:ff:ff:ff:ff:ff inet6 fe80::fc1a:4aff:fe16:158/64 scope link valid_lft forever preferred_lft forever 32: vnet1: <BROADCAST,MULTICAST,UP,LOWER_UP> mtu 1500 qdisc pfifo_fast master vmnet state UNKNOWN qlen 500 link/ether fe:1a:4a:16:01:5c brd ff:ff:ff:ff:ff:ff inet6 fe80::fc1a:4aff:fe16:15c/64 scope link valid_lft forever preferred_lft forever where vnet1 is the VM interface, and p2p1.91 is the VLAN'd interface for the network. The network the VM nic is on is vmnet, and the physical interface is p2p1 Configuring an address manually does not help, nor does dropping the firewall on the host. I've run the vmnet interface in promiscuous mode to see if I can see anything coming back, but the return traffic does not appear. Any ideas as to why the network is not working? Thanks for any help. -Cam
--Apple-Mail=_C3E6E75B-214E-4F74-B88D-D55011D9644E Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="Apple-Mail=_3721D104-5E36-4C05-A875-829E04921212" --Apple-Mail=_3721D104-5E36-4C05-A875-829E04921212 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Can you eliminate the switch or port config as the issue? I=E2=80=99m a = little unclear as to how you configured the nodes I have basically use a = single NIC (some are LACP bonds) with a GENERAL link type (not TRUNK or = ACCESS) where there is a default VLAN (which I don=E2=80=99t tag) and = the rest of the VLANs are tagged. On my switch (TP-LINK) I have to go = to the VLANs and say TAG on all of them except the DEFAULT one. I = couldn=E2=80=99t get TRUNK working even with one untagged and the rest = tagged. For me, using GENERAL was the way I did it. I=E2=80=99m not a networking except on hardware but this discussion may = clarify. I have no idea why TRUNK didn=E2=80=99t work over GENERAL and = didn=E2=80=99t spend much more time than that but here=E2=80=99s a = discussion on the topic = https://supportforums.cisco.com/discussion/11897946/general-vs-trunk-mode = <https://supportforums.cisco.com/discussion/11897946/general-vs-trunk-mode=
On Sep 14, 2016, at 3:08 PM, cmc <iucounu@gmail.com> wrote: =20 Hi, =20 I have modified my VM network to have multiple tagged networks. It = used to be an untagged network and it worked fine, but I needed to add = more networks on the host. The switch it is connected to has the port = configured as a trunk port with these VLANs. When a VM sends traffic out = (to get a DHCP address for instance), it reaches the server but does not = get the DHCP offer that the server sends. I did a tcpdump on the node =
Tom that hosts the VM and the packets going out do not have a VLAN tag. I = assume the VM host interface would should not have the tag present, but = that the p2p1.91 interface should put the VLAN tag on.
=20 The relevant interface configuration on the node that the VM host is = on looks like: =20 27: sohonet_DMZ: <BROADCAST,MULTICAST,UP,LOWER_UP> mtu 1500 qdisc = noqueue state UP link/ether a0:36:9f:2a:63:20 brd ff:ff:ff:ff:ff:ff 29: p2p1.91@p2p1: <BROADCAST,MULTICAST,UP,LOWER_UP> mtu 1500 qdisc = noqueue master vmnet state UP link/ether a0:36:9f:2a:63:20 brd ff:ff:ff:ff:ff:ff 30: vmnet: <BROADCAST,MULTICAST,UP,LOWER_UP> mtu 1500 qdisc noqueue = state UP link/ether a0:36:9f:2a:63:20 brd ff:ff:ff:ff:ff:ff inet6 fe80::a236:9fff:fe2a:6320/64 scope link valid_lft forever preferred_lft forever 31: vnet0: <BROADCAST,MULTICAST,UP,LOWER_UP> mtu 1500 qdisc pfifo_fast = master vmnet state UNKNOWN qlen 500 link/ether fe:1a:4a:16:01:58 brd ff:ff:ff:ff:ff:ff inet6 fe80::fc1a:4aff:fe16:158/64 scope link valid_lft forever preferred_lft forever 32: vnet1: <BROADCAST,MULTICAST,UP,LOWER_UP> mtu 1500 qdisc pfifo_fast = master vmnet state UNKNOWN qlen 500 link/ether fe:1a:4a:16:01:5c brd ff:ff:ff:ff:ff:ff inet6 fe80::fc1a:4aff:fe16:15c/64 scope link valid_lft forever preferred_lft forever =20 where vnet1 is the VM interface, and p2p1.91 is the VLAN'd interface = for the network. The network the VM nic is on is vmnet, and the physical = interface is p2p1 =20 Configuring an address manually does not help, nor does dropping the = firewall on the host. I've run the vmnet interface in promiscuous mode to see if I can see = anything coming back, but the return traffic does not appear. =20 Any ideas as to why the network is not working? =20 Thanks for any help. =20 -Cam =20 =20 _______________________________________________ Users mailing list Users@ovirt.org http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/users
--Apple-Mail=_3721D104-5E36-4C05-A875-829E04921212 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/html; charset=utf-8 <html><head><meta http-equiv=3D"Content-Type" content=3D"text/html = charset=3Dutf-8"></head><body style=3D"word-wrap: break-word; = -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space;" = class=3D"">Can you eliminate the switch or port config as the issue? = I=E2=80=99m a little unclear as to how you configured the nodes I = have basically use a single NIC (some are LACP bonds) with a GENERAL = link type (not TRUNK or ACCESS) where there is a default VLAN (which I = don=E2=80=99t tag) and the rest of the VLANs are tagged. On my = switch (TP-LINK) I have to go to the VLANs and say TAG on all of them = except the DEFAULT one. I couldn=E2=80=99t get TRUNK working even = with one untagged and the rest tagged. For me, using GENERAL was the way = I did it.<div class=3D""><br class=3D""></div><div class=3D"">I=E2=80=99m = not a networking except on hardware but this discussion may clarify. = I have no idea why TRUNK didn=E2=80=99t work over GENERAL and = didn=E2=80=99t spend much more time than that but here=E2=80=99s a = discussion on the topic <a = href=3D"https://supportforums.cisco.com/discussion/11897946/general-vs-tru= nk-mode" = class=3D"">https://supportforums.cisco.com/discussion/11897946/general-vs-= trunk-mode</a></div><div class=3D""><br class=3D""></div><div = class=3D"">Tom<br class=3D""> <br class=3D""><div><blockquote type=3D"cite" class=3D""><div = class=3D"">On Sep 14, 2016, at 3:08 PM, cmc <<a = href=3D"mailto:iucounu@gmail.com" class=3D"">iucounu@gmail.com</a>> = wrote:</div><br class=3D"Apple-interchange-newline"><div class=3D""><div = dir=3D"ltr" class=3D""><div class=3D""><div class=3D""><div = class=3D""><div class=3D""><div class=3D"">Hi,<br class=3D""><br = class=3D""></div>I have modified my VM network to have multiple tagged = networks. It used to be an untagged network and it worked fine, but I = needed to add more networks on the host. The switch it is connected to = has the port configured as a trunk port with these VLANs. When a VM = sends traffic out (to get a DHCP address for instance), it reaches the = server but does not get the DHCP offer that the server sends. I did a = tcpdump on the node that hosts the VM and the packets going out do not = have a VLAN tag. I assume the VM host interface would should not have = the tag present, but that the p2p1.91 interface should put the = VLAN tag on.<br class=3D""><br class=3D"">The relevant interface = configuration on the node that the VM host is on looks like:<br = class=3D""><br class=3D"">27: sohonet_DMZ: = <BROADCAST,MULTICAST,UP,LOWER_UP> mtu 1500 qdisc noqueue state UP = <br class=3D""> link/ether a0:36:9f:2a:63:20 brd = ff:ff:ff:ff:ff:ff<br class=3D"">29: p2p1.91@p2p1: = <BROADCAST,MULTICAST,UP,LOWER_UP> mtu 1500 qdisc noqueue master = vmnet state UP <br class=3D""> link/ether = a0:36:9f:2a:63:20 brd ff:ff:ff:ff:ff:ff<br class=3D"">30: vmnet: = <BROADCAST,MULTICAST,UP,LOWER_UP> mtu 1500 qdisc noqueue state UP = <br class=3D""> link/ether a0:36:9f:2a:63:20 brd = ff:ff:ff:ff:ff:ff<br class=3D""> inet6 = fe80::a236:9fff:fe2a:6320/64 scope link <br = class=3D""> valid_lft forever = preferred_lft forever<br class=3D"">31: vnet0: = <BROADCAST,MULTICAST,UP,LOWER_UP> mtu 1500 qdisc pfifo_fast master = vmnet state UNKNOWN qlen 500<br class=3D""> link/ether = fe:1a:4a:16:01:58 brd ff:ff:ff:ff:ff:ff<br class=3D""> = inet6 fe80::fc1a:4aff:fe16:158/64 scope link <br = class=3D""> valid_lft forever = preferred_lft forever<br class=3D"">32: vnet1: = <BROADCAST,MULTICAST,UP,LOWER_UP> mtu 1500 qdisc pfifo_fast master = vmnet state UNKNOWN qlen 500<br class=3D""> link/ether = fe:1a:4a:16:01:5c brd ff:ff:ff:ff:ff:ff<br class=3D""> = inet6 fe80::fc1a:4aff:fe16:15c/64 scope link <br = class=3D""> valid_lft forever = preferred_lft forever<br class=3D""><br class=3D""></div>where vnet1 is = the VM interface, and p2p1.91 is the VLAN'd interface for the network. = The network the VM nic is on is vmnet, and the physical interface is = p2p1<br class=3D""><br class=3D""></div>Configuring an address manually = does not help, nor does dropping the firewall on the host.<br = class=3D""></div><div class=3D"">I've run the vmnet interface in = promiscuous mode to see if I can see anything coming back, but the = return traffic does not appear.<br class=3D""></div><div class=3D""><br = class=3D"">Any ideas as to why the network is not working?<br = class=3D""><br class=3D""></div>Thanks for any help.<br class=3D""><br = class=3D""></div>-Cam<br class=3D""><div class=3D""><div class=3D""><div = class=3D""><br class=3D""><br class=3D""></div></div></div></div> _______________________________________________<br class=3D"">Users = mailing list<br class=3D""><a href=3D"mailto:Users@ovirt.org" = class=3D"">Users@ovirt.org</a><br = class=3D"">http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/users<br = class=3D""></div></blockquote></div><br class=3D""></div></body></html>= --Apple-Mail=_3721D104-5E36-4C05-A875-829E04921212-- --Apple-Mail=_C3E6E75B-214E-4F74-B88D-D55011D9644E Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=signature.asc Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name=signature.asc Content-Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Comment: GPGTools - https://gpgtools.org iQIcBAEBCgAGBQJX2o8fAAoJEO2TmglRQu3EcTIQAJVAYDp5TnSBt9TFezggalAO q9RavluTfTuGsKk6LbaHXLov1X3LqFqW1WKrvR2QuBX/AEPFP/hMVHw2l6lDrj3Z sN2IrMZeWguhPWLRKAmfBy+QQeAC2Rotw0xUY4WoE1GHplA4ld0LHIWwNOsGyEJr q2u8LUB47BdjDf4008+O08JpThAGYMyTKjtY1jPcCVaK+phIdQ/ABzmzXhKhreBf iOgJLTaJ9jdCFOIcrKjQyiHpBKH+K6ALYqLoV4Uv9jGxZQf3CO+PtgvlAdOUNkyM SMHsz2/pdO4ho4ta42PtN8JhJggoeMOQComc9Hya7IIretSj93sXqXmNzoZASK9c 9C4UXiUXJbWGwzroNZRYzq6LmW6nb/bU92f9RLxrrgNp9WP2RkmYFtmLnV8wOmaQ VhIFKX0/wdAfCqImnL/i8U0rixjzJywdMX8eKJNlRpLBUH3a07zzMvKF0erHS15s vJnVe1RcN9IemV/xvEbAVBO+I2fNdvGwvxJkFeGjBL77fXaufGRI6cN5b/3KkjYS URpD3YHx+NreIuj5OWaYklhQLTCdi1bxGXaRGbGj1JcGcxsjh/brBil4jkI8QLMU w/Q1u5H/vvoWOfuyhIM3GLJIbg1eYItXqMDiO4eXNE05+SnxuMW5CfDTmZuzoSMN aLsv2x1EE9yVyoKXdr0G =8C2X -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --Apple-Mail=_C3E6E75B-214E-4F74-B88D-D55011D9644E--
Hi Tom, It turns out that the issue was setting a default aka native VLAN on the switch port. The switch is an Arista. After I'd tried re-creating the networks on the oVirt side, I thought I'd just try removing the default VLAN, and it worked. For whatever reason, our VMWare cluster (that I'm trying to migrate away from) has this setting, as do our blade centres, and they have no problem. I'm not sure why you'd want a default Anyway, thanks for the reply - all sorted now! Cheers, Cam On Thu, Sep 15, 2016 at 1:07 PM, Tom Gamull <tgamull@redhat.com> wrote:
Can you eliminate the switch or port config as the issue? I’m a little unclear as to how you configured the nodes I have basically use a single NIC (some are LACP bonds) with a GENERAL link type (not TRUNK or ACCESS) where there is a default VLAN (which I don’t tag) and the rest of the VLANs are tagged. On my switch (TP-LINK) I have to go to the VLANs and say TAG on all of them except the DEFAULT one. I couldn’t get TRUNK working even with one untagged and the rest tagged. For me, using GENERAL was the way I did it.
I’m not a networking except on hardware but this discussion may clarify. I have no idea why TRUNK didn’t work over GENERAL and didn’t spend much more time than that but here’s a discussion on the topic https://supportforums.cisco.com/discussion/11897946/general-vs-trunk-mode
Tom
On Sep 14, 2016, at 3:08 PM, cmc <iucounu@gmail.com> wrote:
Hi,
I have modified my VM network to have multiple tagged networks. It used to be an untagged network and it worked fine, but I needed to add more networks on the host. The switch it is connected to has the port configured as a trunk port with these VLANs. When a VM sends traffic out (to get a DHCP address for instance), it reaches the server but does not get the DHCP offer that the server sends. I did a tcpdump on the node that hosts the VM and the packets going out do not have a VLAN tag. I assume the VM host interface would should not have the tag present, but that the p2p1.91 interface should put the VLAN tag on.
The relevant interface configuration on the node that the VM host is on looks like:
27: sohonet_DMZ: <BROADCAST,MULTICAST,UP,LOWER_UP> mtu 1500 qdisc noqueue state UP link/ether a0:36:9f:2a:63:20 brd ff:ff:ff:ff:ff:ff 29: p2p1.91@p2p1: <BROADCAST,MULTICAST,UP,LOWER_UP> mtu 1500 qdisc noqueue master vmnet state UP link/ether a0:36:9f:2a:63:20 brd ff:ff:ff:ff:ff:ff 30: vmnet: <BROADCAST,MULTICAST,UP,LOWER_UP> mtu 1500 qdisc noqueue state UP link/ether a0:36:9f:2a:63:20 brd ff:ff:ff:ff:ff:ff inet6 fe80::a236:9fff:fe2a:6320/64 scope link valid_lft forever preferred_lft forever 31: vnet0: <BROADCAST,MULTICAST,UP,LOWER_UP> mtu 1500 qdisc pfifo_fast master vmnet state UNKNOWN qlen 500 link/ether fe:1a:4a:16:01:58 brd ff:ff:ff:ff:ff:ff inet6 fe80::fc1a:4aff:fe16:158/64 scope link valid_lft forever preferred_lft forever 32: vnet1: <BROADCAST,MULTICAST,UP,LOWER_UP> mtu 1500 qdisc pfifo_fast master vmnet state UNKNOWN qlen 500 link/ether fe:1a:4a:16:01:5c brd ff:ff:ff:ff:ff:ff inet6 fe80::fc1a:4aff:fe16:15c/64 scope link valid_lft forever preferred_lft forever
where vnet1 is the VM interface, and p2p1.91 is the VLAN'd interface for the network. The network the VM nic is on is vmnet, and the physical interface is p2p1
Configuring an address manually does not help, nor does dropping the firewall on the host. I've run the vmnet interface in promiscuous mode to see if I can see anything coming back, but the return traffic does not appear.
Any ideas as to why the network is not working?
Thanks for any help.
-Cam
_______________________________________________ Users mailing list Users@ovirt.org http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/users
participants (2)
-
cmc -
Tom Gamull