[ovs-discuss] Same mac address of br0 and eth0
Jingfei Hu
jingfei.hu at gmail.com
Wed Mar 21 00:30:48 PDT 2012
No, still the ping DUP problem is there. Is there difference between the
tap0 created by tunctl and openvpn? Or in your configuration tunctl is
adopted?
Cheers,
Jfhu
2012/3/21 Aaron Rosen <arosen at clemson.edu>
> As a blind guess does this change anything (Using tunctl over your openvpn
> command)?
>
> ovs-vsctl del-port br0 tap0
> tunctl -d tap0
> tunctl
> ovs-vsctl add-port br0 tap0
> Restart vm using the new tap0
>
>
>
> On Wed, Mar 21, 2012 at 1:20 AM, Ben Pfaff <blp at nicira.com> wrote:
>
>> The evidence points to a configuration error, since plenty of other
>> users do not see duplicate packets in similar situations. Again I
>> suggest that you read REPORTING-BUGS and provide the information
>> suggested there.
>>
>> On Wed, Mar 21, 2012 at 01:04:20PM +0800, Jingfei Hu wrote:
>> > Hi, Ben,
>> > In the last few days, I have spent my spare time on figuring out the
>> reason
>> > of ping DUP problem. Here is my result:
>> > The network setting including netmask\default gateway etc. contains no
>> > error. Following is the ip address setting and routing table of the host
>> > and the guest:
>> > --------------------------------------------------------------
>> > Host:
>> > IP address:
>> > br0: 192.168.1.27 netmask 255.255.255.0
>> > Routing table:
>> > Destination Gateway Genmask Flags Metric Ref Use
>> > Iface
>> > 0.0.0.0 192.168.1.1 0.0.0.0 UG 0 0 0
>> br0
>> > 192.168.1.0 0.0.0.0 255.255.255.0 U 0 0 0
>> br0
>> >
>> > Guest:
>> > IP address:
>> > eth0: 192.168.1.26 netmask 255.255.255.0
>> > Routing table:
>> > Destination Gateway Genmask Flags Metric Ref Use
>> > Iface
>> > 0.0.0.0 192.168.1.1 0.0.0.0 UG 0 0 0
>> eth0
>> > 169.254.0.0(link-local) 0.0.0.0 255.255.0.0 U 1000
>> 0
>> > 0 eth0
>> > 192.168.1.0 0.0.0.0 255.255.255.0 U 1 0 0
>> eth0
>> > --------------------------------------------------------------
>> > The ping DUP problem is still there.
>> > Then in another machine, the same steps are executed with same host os
>> and
>> > same guest os, except that br0 is created using bridge-utils package,
>> not
>> > ovs-vsctl. When ping from the guest, the DUP problem has gone. So it
>> seems
>> > that the bridge created by ovs-vsctl is different than the bridge
>> created
>> > by bridge-utils package. Is that correct to say this problem is related
>> to
>> > ovs?
>> >
>> > Cheers,
>> >
>> > Hu Jingfei
>> >
>> > 3/19 Ben Pfaff <blp at nicira.com>
>> >
>> > > I don't see how br0 and eth0 having the same MAC address would cause
>> the
>> > > behavior that you mention. I would suggest following a conventional
>> > > troubleshooting procedure instead of making this assumption.
>> > >
>> > > If you want us to help with that troubleshooting then you can start
>> from
>> > > the suggestions in REPORTING-BUGS.
>> > >
>> > > On Mon, Mar 19, 2012 at 10:12:17AM +0800, Jingfei Hu wrote:
>> > > > Thanks, Ben,
>> > > > But there is a problem here. The following commands have not
>> changed:
>> > > > ------------------------------------
>> > > > sudo ovs-vsctl add-br br0
>> > > > sudo ovs-vsctl set bridge br0 datapath_type=netdev
>> > > > sudo ovs-vsctl add-port br0 eth0
>> > > > sudo ovs-vsctl add-port br0 tap0
>> > > > ------------------------------------
>> > > > The tap0 interface is created using OpenVPN utility with following
>> > > command:
>> > > > ------------------------------------
>> > > > sudo openvpn --mktun --dev tap0
>> > > > ------------------------------------
>> > > > Then I have created a VM using VirtualBox-4.1 and made the VM use
>> the
>> > > > Bridged Adapter tap0. IP address settings are:
>> > > > ------------------------------------
>> > > > In my host:
>> > > > sudo ifconfig br0 192.168.1.24 netmask 255.255.255.0
>> > > > eth0 and tap0 got no ip address assigned
>> > > > In the guest, i.e. VM:
>> > > > sudo ifconfig eth0 192.168.1.26 netmask 255.255.255.0
>> > > > ------------------------------------
>> > > > After that, my guest is able to reach the outside network, and the
>> > > machine
>> > > > which resides in the same LAN, says it's ip address is 192.168.1.14,
>> > > could
>> > > > also found my guest. The PROBLEM is:
>> > > > when I ping the 192.168.1.14 from my guest, the ICMP reply is always
>> > > > duplicated. I guess the cause is because the br0 has the same mac
>> address
>> > > > with eth0, but don't know how to solve it.
>> > > > Any ideas will be appreciated. Sorry for the question in question, I
>> > > should
>> > > > ask it in one post.
>> > > >
>> > > > Cheers,
>> > > > Hu Jingfei
>> > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > 2012/3/18 Ben Pfaff <blp at nicira.com>
>> > > >
>> > > > > On Sun, Mar 18, 2012 at 10:46:36PM +0800, Jingfei Hu wrote:
>> > > > > > I have installed OVS userspace program on Ubuntu Oneiric
>> according to
>> > > > > > INSTALL.Linux. Then I have added a bridge using following
>> commands:
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > > sudo ovs-vsctl add-br br0
>> > > > > > sudo ovs-vsctl set bridge br0 datapath_type=netdev
>> > > > > > sudo ovs-vsctl add-port br0 eth0
>> > > > > > sudo ovs-vsctl add-port br0 tap0
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > > Then I setup the bridge br0 as follows:
>> > > > > > sudo ifconfig br0 192.168.1.24 netmask 255.255.255.0
>> > > > > > After that, I check it with command ifconfig -a, finding that
>> the
>> > > mac br0
>> > > > > > and eth0 have the same mac.
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > > Is it normal?
>> > > > >
>> > > > > Yes.
>> > > > >
>> > >
>> _______________________________________________
>> discuss mailing list
>> discuss at openvswitch.org
>> http://openvswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
>>
>
>
>
> --
> Aaron O. Rosen
> Masters Student - Network Communication
> 306B Fluor Daniel
>
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://openvswitch.org/pipermail/discuss/attachments/20120321/3099aa7c/attachment.htm>
More information about the discuss
mailing list