You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to users@cloudstack.apache.org by Olivier Guin <ol...@gmail.com> on 2020/04/23 11:41:31 UTC
Re: Network problem Cloudstack 4.13 Xen 6.5 Linux VM [URGENT]
Hello Vivek,
Thank you for your answer.
There is Qos on the VR and VM interfaces but I don't know who manages
it, Cloudstack, XenCenter or Xen Server?
Other operation that I made:
1) New installation Windows 2012, everything is OK good speed
2) New CentOS 7 installation Very poor flow ... fast at first and more
flow thereafter.
3) New CentOS7 installation on the same Network as Windows 2012, same
result no speed ... ! but vm windows OK !
|
--10.0.1.193-- VM Windows 2012 (OK)
Internet --- (200.13.XXX.XXX)--VR--(10.0.1.1)
| --10.0.1.42
-- VM CentOS7 (NOK)
Conclusion, it must come from taking into account the network under
Linux I suppose ... and that since the migration in version 4.13 ...
I don't understand !
If anyone ever had this problem ...
Thank you
Olivier
Le 22/04/2020 à 12:02, Vivek Kumar a écrit :
> Hello Olivier,
>
> You can check QoS setting on the VIF on the VR which is connected to the network which also connects to your VM. As far as my knowledge is concerned, XenServer Applied QoS for outgoing traffic only not for Incoming traffic, So it might be possible that traffic sending out to the VM has some QoS limit. You can check that.
>
>
>
> Vivek Kumar
> Manager - Cloud & DevOps
> IndiQus Technologies
> 24*7 O +91 11 4055 1411 | M +91 7503460090
> www.indiqus.com <http://indiqus.com/>
>
> This message is intended only for the use of the individual or entity to which it is addressed and may contain information that is confidential and/or privileged. If you are not the intended recipient please delete the original message and any copy of it from your computer system. You are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited unless proper authorization has been obtained for such action. If you have received this communication in error, please notify the sender immediately. Although IndiQus attempts to sweep e-mail and attachments for viruses, it does not guarantee that both are virus-free and accepts no liability for any damage sustained as a result of viruses.
>
>> On 22-Apr-2020, at 5:16 PM, Olivier Guin <ol...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> Hello
>>
>>
>> Cloudstack 4.13, Xen 6.5
>>
>> I would like to know if there is a command to 'clean up' in the Networking tab unused networks in XenCenter !
>> Can I delete networks with a Link Status <None>? in the XenCenter.
>> I have no traffic on my VMs, but on virtual routers yes.
>> Ex: From the router:
>> wget http://xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx/x86_64/CentOS-7-x86_64-Minimal-1908.iso <http://xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx/x86_64/CentOS-7-x86_64-Minimal-1908.iso> -> 200 Mbps
>> From the vm: 15 kbps!
>> Do you have an idea, I think it's since the migration from 4.11 to 4.13!
>> Thank you
>>
>> Olivier
>> --
>>
>> Olivier GUIN
>> Direction
>> 05 94 31 02 44
>>
>>
>>
>> <jjhlnlgfioplaeoi.jpg>
>> 513 ZI Collery 5
>> 97300 CAYENNE
>> <http://www.wayscom.com/>www.wayscom.com <http://www.wayscom.com/>
>
--
Marsouins */Olivier GUIN
/*/ GSM 0694 21 32 50/
/E3 - M.F.1. (Moniteur Fédéral - FFESSM)
MONITEUR NITROX CONFIRME
Spécification Technicien Inspection Visuelle
Spécification RIFA plongée/
Re: Cloudstack 4.13 Xen 6.5 Xen 7 and XCP-NG
Posted by Olivier Guin <ol...@gmail.com>.
Hi,
It's perfect !
XCP-ng 7.6 work fine with 4.13, and network speed it's ok now
cheers
Olivier
Le 29/04/2020 à 11:41, Andrija Panic a écrit :
> XCP-ng 7.4, 7.6 should work just fine with 4.13 - hope that answers all 3
> questions.
>
> XCP-ng 8.x is not yet supported (might be in 4.15/summer LTS release)
>
> cheers
>
> On Wed, 29 Apr 2020 at 12:36, Olivier GUIN <ol...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> hello Andrija,
>>
>> I have just set up a Xenserver 7.6 cluster, but I think that the license
>> problem will be a brake!
>> - Does Cloudstack work optimally with XCP-NG?
>> - If YES until which version?
>> - Will XCP-NG be compatible with the future Cloudstack 4.14?
>>
>> Cheers,
>>
>> Olivier
>> Le 24/04/2020 à 08:59, Andrija Panic a écrit :
>>
>> Not necessarily - i.e. you should still observe multiple hundredns of
>> megabits/sec with default VR offering, with the routing process.
>> I would pay attention to the network throttling set on XS side, as Vivek
>> has already suggested in another email.
>>
>> On Fri, 24 Apr 2020 at 13:51, Olivier GUIN <ol...@gmail.com> <ol...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>> Hi Andrija,
>>
>> You wrote that there would be my CPU / RAM ratio which would cause the
>> throttled on my interface.
>> What would be the right CPU / RAM ratio?
>>
>> If you have a recommendation.
>>
>> I think my problem comes from there ..
>> I made a VM with 4GB RAM and 4 vCPU at 2Ghz and it works very well!
>> (Linux/Windows)
>>
>> Cheers,
>> Olivier
>>
>> Le 23/04/2020 à 17:33, Andrija Panic a écrit :
>>
>> (mon français n'est pas si bon) - but if that is a physical server - than
>> it's a valid test - beside the traffic will go through the VR (from VM
>>
>> via
>>
>> VR to that external host) - here you have NAT over relatively slow VR
>> (CPU/RAM) and over the throttled interface most probably.
>>
>> In general, you should not keep mixed XS versions (whatever is true for
>> XenServer alone, irrelevant of the CloudStack), as 7.x is a big
>>
>> difference
>>
>> to 6.5 and i.e. VM live migrations will not work (and I'm sure many other
>> things, possibly)
>>
>> That being said, make sure to TEST the upgrade (pool master, then slaves,
>> then see how to reconnect hosts to ACS, etc, etc) - if this is your test
>> env - better start from scratch.
>>
>> 7.1 LTSR is recommended over 7.0 any day.
>>
>> Cheers
>> Andrija
>>
>> On Thu, 23 Apr 2020 at 22:22, Olivier GUIN <ol...@gmail.com> <ol...@gmail.com>
>>
>> wrote:
>>
>> Hi Andrija,
>>
>> Thank for your anwser ...
>>
>> 1) My Cloudstack is 4.13
>>
>> 2) Can I mix a version of xen 6.5 and xen 7 in the same cluster? (I
>>
>> think
>>
>> I cannot move a VM from one cluster to another)
>>
>> 3) 200.13.xxx.xxx est un de mes serveurs sur mon réseau physique
>>
>> I think the problem comes from my service offerings
>>
>> I keep looking ...
>>
>> But I think upgrading my Xen servers from 6.5 to 7 is a good idea.
>>
>> Point 2 is important !
>>
>> Regards,
>>
>> Olivier
>>
Re: Cloudstack 4.13 Xen 6.5 Xen 7 and XCP-NG
Posted by Andrija Panic <an...@gmail.com>.
XCP-ng 7.4, 7.6 should work just fine with 4.13 - hope that answers all 3
questions.
XCP-ng 8.x is not yet supported (might be in 4.15/summer LTS release)
cheers
On Wed, 29 Apr 2020 at 12:36, Olivier GUIN <ol...@gmail.com> wrote:
> hello Andrija,
>
> I have just set up a Xenserver 7.6 cluster, but I think that the license
> problem will be a brake!
> - Does Cloudstack work optimally with XCP-NG?
> - If YES until which version?
> - Will XCP-NG be compatible with the future Cloudstack 4.14?
>
> Cheers,
>
> Olivier
> Le 24/04/2020 à 08:59, Andrija Panic a écrit :
>
> Not necessarily - i.e. you should still observe multiple hundredns of
> megabits/sec with default VR offering, with the routing process.
> I would pay attention to the network throttling set on XS side, as Vivek
> has already suggested in another email.
>
> On Fri, 24 Apr 2020 at 13:51, Olivier GUIN <ol...@gmail.com> <ol...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
> Hi Andrija,
>
> You wrote that there would be my CPU / RAM ratio which would cause the
> throttled on my interface.
> What would be the right CPU / RAM ratio?
>
> If you have a recommendation.
>
> I think my problem comes from there ..
> I made a VM with 4GB RAM and 4 vCPU at 2Ghz and it works very well!
> (Linux/Windows)
>
> Cheers,
> Olivier
>
> Le 23/04/2020 à 17:33, Andrija Panic a écrit :
>
> (mon français n'est pas si bon) - but if that is a physical server - than
> it's a valid test - beside the traffic will go through the VR (from VM
>
> via
>
> VR to that external host) - here you have NAT over relatively slow VR
> (CPU/RAM) and over the throttled interface most probably.
>
> In general, you should not keep mixed XS versions (whatever is true for
> XenServer alone, irrelevant of the CloudStack), as 7.x is a big
>
> difference
>
> to 6.5 and i.e. VM live migrations will not work (and I'm sure many other
> things, possibly)
>
> That being said, make sure to TEST the upgrade (pool master, then slaves,
> then see how to reconnect hosts to ACS, etc, etc) - if this is your test
> env - better start from scratch.
>
> 7.1 LTSR is recommended over 7.0 any day.
>
> Cheers
> Andrija
>
> On Thu, 23 Apr 2020 at 22:22, Olivier GUIN <ol...@gmail.com> <ol...@gmail.com>
>
> wrote:
>
> Hi Andrija,
>
> Thank for your anwser ...
>
> 1) My Cloudstack is 4.13
>
> 2) Can I mix a version of xen 6.5 and xen 7 in the same cluster? (I
>
> think
>
> I cannot move a VM from one cluster to another)
>
> 3) 200.13.xxx.xxx est un de mes serveurs sur mon réseau physique
>
> I think the problem comes from my service offerings
>
> I keep looking ...
>
> But I think upgrading my Xen servers from 6.5 to 7 is a good idea.
>
> Point 2 is important !
>
> Regards,
>
> Olivier
> Le 23/04/2020 à 16:02, Andrija Panic a écrit :
>
> Hi Olivier,
>
> Upgrade to 4.13 should not be a problem here. I would suggest:
>
>
> - checking traffic shaping on XenServer side - to confirm what is/is not
> in place (we don't know your network offerings/compute offerings network
> rates and such)
> - Confirm VM/drivers used inside VMs are all up to date (6.5 is an
>
> ancient
>
> thing, not supported any more in ACS 4.14 that will be out soon)
>
>
> You are doing: iperf3 -c 200.13.XXX.XXX -p5001
>
> Why are you connecting to the IP of the VR? What kind of testing is this
> supposed to be/show what?
>
>
>
> Why not starting iperf server on Centos 7 and connect to it from Windows
> 2012 (and the other way around)?
> This traffic is NOT going over the virtual router, but just via the same
> "network" on XS.
>
> I'll try ok
>
>
> Alternatively, you can deploy VPC (multiple isolated networks behind a
>
> VR)
>
> - and have VM1 in network1, VM2 in network2 - and do iperf between them
> (traffic router via VR) - here keep in mind even if your VM's NIC are
> 1Gbps, but your VR NICs are 100 Mbps, you will be limited to the slowest
> nic in the whole path/chain - 100 Mbps.
>
> OK
>
>
> Regards,
> Andrija
> -
>
> On Thu, 23 Apr 2020 at 20:34, Olivier Guin <ol...@gmail.com> <ol...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>
> Hello,
>
> Some news :
>
> from VM to SRV :
>
> [root@centos7 centos]# iperf3 -c 200.13.XXX.XXX -p5001
> Connecting to host 200.13.XXX.XXX, port 5001
> [ 4] local 10.0.1.42 port 56190 connected to 200.13.XXX.XXX port 5001
> [ ID] Interval Transfer Bandwidth Retr Cwnd
> [ 4] 0.00-1.00 sec 12.9 MBytes 108 Mbits/sec 77 55.1 KBytes
> [ 4] 1.00-2.00 sec 11.9 MBytes 100 Mbits/sec 51 45.2 KBytes
> [ 4] 2.00-3.00 sec 9.96 MBytes 83.6 Mbits/sec 36 28.3 KBytes
> [ 4] 3.00-4.00 sec 9.37 MBytes 78.6 Mbits/sec 33 25.5 KBytes
> [ 4] 4.00-5.00 sec 11.1 MBytes 93.5 Mbits/sec 24 50.9 KBytes
> [ 4] 5.00-6.00 sec 11.2 MBytes 94.2 Mbits/sec 24 82.0 KBytes
> [ 4] 6.00-7.07 sec 12.9 MBytes 101 Mbits/sec 38 143 KBytes
> [ 4] 7.07-8.07 sec 9.03 MBytes 75.2 Mbits/sec 13 123 KBytes
> [ 4] 8.07-9.00 sec 12.5 MBytes 113 Mbits/sec 24 103 KBytes
> [ 4] 9.00-10.06 sec 13.6 MBytes 107 Mbits/sec 98 140 KBytes
> - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
> [ ID] Interval Transfer Bandwidth Retr
> [ 4] 0.00-10.06 sec 114 MBytes 95.4 Mbits/sec 418
> sender
> [ 4] 0.00-10.06 sec 114 MBytes 95.4 Mbits/sec
> receiver
>
> from SRV to VM :
>
> [root@centos7 centos]# iperf3 -s -p 5001
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> Server listening on 5001
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> Accepted connection from 200.13.XXX.XXX, port 48782
> [ 5] local 10.0.1.42 port 5001 connected to 200.13.XXX.XXX port 48784
> [ ID] Interval Transfer Bandwidth
> [ 5] 0.00-1.00 sec 7.95 MBytes 66.7 Mbits/sec
> [ 5] 1.00-2.00 sec 10.6 MBytes 88.7 Mbits/sec
> [ 5] 2.00-3.00 sec 0.00 Bytes 0.00 bits/sec
> [ 5] 3.00-4.00 sec 0.00 Bytes 0.00 bits/sec
> [ 5] 4.00-5.00 sec 0.00 Bytes 0.00 bits/sec
> [ 5] 5.00-6.00 sec 0.00 Bytes 0.00 bits/sec
> [ 5] 6.00-7.00 sec 0.00 Bytes 0.00 bits/sec
> [ 5] 7.00-8.00 sec 0.00 Bytes 0.00 bits/sec
> [ 5] 8.00-9.00 sec 0.00 Bytes 0.00 bits/sec
> [ 5] 9.00-10.00 sec 0.00 Bytes 0.00 bits/sec
> [ 5] 10.00-11.00 sec 0.00 Bytes 0.00 bits/sec
> [ 5] 11.00-11.52 sec 0.00 Bytes 0.00 bits/sec
> - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
> [ ID] Interval Transfer Bandwidth
> [ 5] 0.00-11.52 sec 0.00 Bytes 0.00 bits/sec
>
> sender
>
> [ 5] 0.00-11.52 sec 18.5 MBytes 13.5 Mbits/sec
> receiver
>
> Regards,
>
> Olivier
>
>
>
> --
>
> Andrija Panić
>
>
>
>
--
Andrija Panić
Cloudstack 4.13 Xen 6.5 Xen 7 and XCP-NG
Posted by Olivier GUIN <ol...@gmail.com>.
hello Andrija,
I have just set up a Xenserver 7.6 cluster, but I think that the license
problem will be a brake!
- Does Cloudstack work optimally with XCP-NG?
- If YES until which version?
- Will XCP-NG be compatible with the future Cloudstack 4.14?
Cheers,
Olivier
Le 24/04/2020 à 08:59, Andrija Panic a écrit :
> Not necessarily - i.e. you should still observe multiple hundredns of
> megabits/sec with default VR offering, with the routing process.
> I would pay attention to the network throttling set on XS side, as Vivek
> has already suggested in another email.
>
> On Fri, 24 Apr 2020 at 13:51, Olivier GUIN <ol...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Hi Andrija,
>>
>> You wrote that there would be my CPU / RAM ratio which would cause the
>> throttled on my interface.
>> What would be the right CPU / RAM ratio?
>>
>> If you have a recommendation.
>>
>> I think my problem comes from there ..
>> I made a VM with 4GB RAM and 4 vCPU at 2Ghz and it works very well!
>> (Linux/Windows)
>>
>> Cheers,
>> Olivier
>>
>> Le 23/04/2020 à 17:33, Andrija Panic a écrit :
>>> (mon français n'est pas si bon) - but if that is a physical server - than
>>> it's a valid test - beside the traffic will go through the VR (from VM
>> via
>>> VR to that external host) - here you have NAT over relatively slow VR
>>> (CPU/RAM) and over the throttled interface most probably.
>>>
>>> In general, you should not keep mixed XS versions (whatever is true for
>>> XenServer alone, irrelevant of the CloudStack), as 7.x is a big
>> difference
>>> to 6.5 and i.e. VM live migrations will not work (and I'm sure many other
>>> things, possibly)
>>>
>>> That being said, make sure to TEST the upgrade (pool master, then slaves,
>>> then see how to reconnect hosts to ACS, etc, etc) - if this is your test
>>> env - better start from scratch.
>>>
>>> 7.1 LTSR is recommended over 7.0 any day.
>>>
>>> Cheers
>>> Andrija
>>>
>>> On Thu, 23 Apr 2020 at 22:22, Olivier GUIN <ol...@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>>> Hi Andrija,
>>>>
>>>> Thank for your anwser ...
>>>>
>>>> 1) My Cloudstack is 4.13
>>>>
>>>> 2) Can I mix a version of xen 6.5 and xen 7 in the same cluster? (I
>> think
>>>> I cannot move a VM from one cluster to another)
>>>>
>>>> 3) 200.13.xxx.xxx est un de mes serveurs sur mon réseau physique
>>>>
>>>> I think the problem comes from my service offerings
>>>>
>>>> I keep looking ...
>>>>
>>>> But I think upgrading my Xen servers from 6.5 to 7 is a good idea.
>>>>
>>>> Point 2 is important !
>>>>
>>>> Regards,
>>>>
>>>> Olivier
>>>> Le 23/04/2020 à 16:02, Andrija Panic a écrit :
>>>>
>>>> Hi Olivier,
>>>>
>>>> Upgrade to 4.13 should not be a problem here. I would suggest:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> - checking traffic shaping on XenServer side - to confirm what is/is not
>>>> in place (we don't know your network offerings/compute offerings network
>>>> rates and such)
>>>> - Confirm VM/drivers used inside VMs are all up to date (6.5 is an
>> ancient
>>>> thing, not supported any more in ACS 4.14 that will be out soon)
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> You are doing: iperf3 -c 200.13.XXX.XXX -p5001
>>>>
>>>> Why are you connecting to the IP of the VR? What kind of testing is this
>>>> supposed to be/show what?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Why not starting iperf server on Centos 7 and connect to it from Windows
>>>> 2012 (and the other way around)?
>>>> This traffic is NOT going over the virtual router, but just via the same
>>>> "network" on XS.
>>>>
>>>> I'll try ok
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Alternatively, you can deploy VPC (multiple isolated networks behind a
>> VR)
>>>> - and have VM1 in network1, VM2 in network2 - and do iperf between them
>>>> (traffic router via VR) - here keep in mind even if your VM's NIC are
>>>> 1Gbps, but your VR NICs are 100 Mbps, you will be limited to the slowest
>>>> nic in the whole path/chain - 100 Mbps.
>>>>
>>>> OK
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Regards,
>>>> Andrija
>>>> -
>>>>
>>>> On Thu, 23 Apr 2020 at 20:34, Olivier Guin <ol...@gmail.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Hello,
>>>>>
>>>>> Some news :
>>>>>
>>>>> from VM to SRV :
>>>>>
>>>>> [root@centos7 centos]# iperf3 -c 200.13.XXX.XXX -p5001
>>>>> Connecting to host 200.13.XXX.XXX, port 5001
>>>>> [ 4] local 10.0.1.42 port 56190 connected to 200.13.XXX.XXX port 5001
>>>>> [ ID] Interval Transfer Bandwidth Retr Cwnd
>>>>> [ 4] 0.00-1.00 sec 12.9 MBytes 108 Mbits/sec 77 55.1 KBytes
>>>>> [ 4] 1.00-2.00 sec 11.9 MBytes 100 Mbits/sec 51 45.2 KBytes
>>>>> [ 4] 2.00-3.00 sec 9.96 MBytes 83.6 Mbits/sec 36 28.3 KBytes
>>>>> [ 4] 3.00-4.00 sec 9.37 MBytes 78.6 Mbits/sec 33 25.5 KBytes
>>>>> [ 4] 4.00-5.00 sec 11.1 MBytes 93.5 Mbits/sec 24 50.9 KBytes
>>>>> [ 4] 5.00-6.00 sec 11.2 MBytes 94.2 Mbits/sec 24 82.0 KBytes
>>>>> [ 4] 6.00-7.07 sec 12.9 MBytes 101 Mbits/sec 38 143 KBytes
>>>>> [ 4] 7.07-8.07 sec 9.03 MBytes 75.2 Mbits/sec 13 123 KBytes
>>>>> [ 4] 8.07-9.00 sec 12.5 MBytes 113 Mbits/sec 24 103 KBytes
>>>>> [ 4] 9.00-10.06 sec 13.6 MBytes 107 Mbits/sec 98 140 KBytes
>>>>> - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
>>>>> [ ID] Interval Transfer Bandwidth Retr
>>>>> [ 4] 0.00-10.06 sec 114 MBytes 95.4 Mbits/sec 418
>>>>> sender
>>>>> [ 4] 0.00-10.06 sec 114 MBytes 95.4 Mbits/sec
>>>>> receiver
>>>>>
>>>>> from SRV to VM :
>>>>>
>>>>> [root@centos7 centos]# iperf3 -s -p 5001
>>>>> -----------------------------------------------------------
>>>>> Server listening on 5001
>>>>> -----------------------------------------------------------
>>>>> Accepted connection from 200.13.XXX.XXX, port 48782
>>>>> [ 5] local 10.0.1.42 port 5001 connected to 200.13.XXX.XXX port 48784
>>>>> [ ID] Interval Transfer Bandwidth
>>>>> [ 5] 0.00-1.00 sec 7.95 MBytes 66.7 Mbits/sec
>>>>> [ 5] 1.00-2.00 sec 10.6 MBytes 88.7 Mbits/sec
>>>>> [ 5] 2.00-3.00 sec 0.00 Bytes 0.00 bits/sec
>>>>> [ 5] 3.00-4.00 sec 0.00 Bytes 0.00 bits/sec
>>>>> [ 5] 4.00-5.00 sec 0.00 Bytes 0.00 bits/sec
>>>>> [ 5] 5.00-6.00 sec 0.00 Bytes 0.00 bits/sec
>>>>> [ 5] 6.00-7.00 sec 0.00 Bytes 0.00 bits/sec
>>>>> [ 5] 7.00-8.00 sec 0.00 Bytes 0.00 bits/sec
>>>>> [ 5] 8.00-9.00 sec 0.00 Bytes 0.00 bits/sec
>>>>> [ 5] 9.00-10.00 sec 0.00 Bytes 0.00 bits/sec
>>>>> [ 5] 10.00-11.00 sec 0.00 Bytes 0.00 bits/sec
>>>>> [ 5] 11.00-11.52 sec 0.00 Bytes 0.00 bits/sec
>>>>> - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
>>>>> [ ID] Interval Transfer Bandwidth
>>>>> [ 5] 0.00-11.52 sec 0.00 Bytes 0.00 bits/sec
>> sender
>>>>> [ 5] 0.00-11.52 sec 18.5 MBytes 13.5 Mbits/sec
>>>>> receiver
>>>>>
>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>
>>>>> Olivier
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>> --
>>>>
>>>> Andrija Panić
>>>>
>>>>
>
Re: Network problem Cloudstack 4.13 Xen 6.5 Linux VM [URGENT] Mix Xen 7
Posted by Andrija Panic <an...@gmail.com>.
Not necessarily - i.e. you should still observe multiple hundredns of
megabits/sec with default VR offering, with the routing process.
I would pay attention to the network throttling set on XS side, as Vivek
has already suggested in another email.
On Fri, 24 Apr 2020 at 13:51, Olivier GUIN <ol...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi Andrija,
>
> You wrote that there would be my CPU / RAM ratio which would cause the
> throttled on my interface.
> What would be the right CPU / RAM ratio?
>
> If you have a recommendation.
>
> I think my problem comes from there ..
> I made a VM with 4GB RAM and 4 vCPU at 2Ghz and it works very well!
> (Linux/Windows)
>
> Cheers,
> Olivier
>
> Le 23/04/2020 à 17:33, Andrija Panic a écrit :
> > (mon français n'est pas si bon) - but if that is a physical server - than
> > it's a valid test - beside the traffic will go through the VR (from VM
> via
> > VR to that external host) - here you have NAT over relatively slow VR
> > (CPU/RAM) and over the throttled interface most probably.
> >
> > In general, you should not keep mixed XS versions (whatever is true for
> > XenServer alone, irrelevant of the CloudStack), as 7.x is a big
> difference
> > to 6.5 and i.e. VM live migrations will not work (and I'm sure many other
> > things, possibly)
> >
> > That being said, make sure to TEST the upgrade (pool master, then slaves,
> > then see how to reconnect hosts to ACS, etc, etc) - if this is your test
> > env - better start from scratch.
> >
> > 7.1 LTSR is recommended over 7.0 any day.
> >
> > Cheers
> > Andrija
> >
> > On Thu, 23 Apr 2020 at 22:22, Olivier GUIN <ol...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >
> >> Hi Andrija,
> >>
> >> Thank for your anwser ...
> >>
> >> 1) My Cloudstack is 4.13
> >>
> >> 2) Can I mix a version of xen 6.5 and xen 7 in the same cluster? (I
> think
> >> I cannot move a VM from one cluster to another)
> >>
> >> 3) 200.13.xxx.xxx est un de mes serveurs sur mon réseau physique
> >>
> >> I think the problem comes from my service offerings
> >>
> >> I keep looking ...
> >>
> >> But I think upgrading my Xen servers from 6.5 to 7 is a good idea.
> >>
> >> Point 2 is important !
> >>
> >> Regards,
> >>
> >> Olivier
> >> Le 23/04/2020 à 16:02, Andrija Panic a écrit :
> >>
> >> Hi Olivier,
> >>
> >> Upgrade to 4.13 should not be a problem here. I would suggest:
> >>
> >>
> >> - checking traffic shaping on XenServer side - to confirm what is/is not
> >> in place (we don't know your network offerings/compute offerings network
> >> rates and such)
> >> - Confirm VM/drivers used inside VMs are all up to date (6.5 is an
> ancient
> >> thing, not supported any more in ACS 4.14 that will be out soon)
> >>
> >>
> >> You are doing: iperf3 -c 200.13.XXX.XXX -p5001
> >>
> >> Why are you connecting to the IP of the VR? What kind of testing is this
> >> supposed to be/show what?
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> Why not starting iperf server on Centos 7 and connect to it from Windows
> >> 2012 (and the other way around)?
> >> This traffic is NOT going over the virtual router, but just via the same
> >> "network" on XS.
> >>
> >> I'll try ok
> >>
> >>
> >> Alternatively, you can deploy VPC (multiple isolated networks behind a
> VR)
> >> - and have VM1 in network1, VM2 in network2 - and do iperf between them
> >> (traffic router via VR) - here keep in mind even if your VM's NIC are
> >> 1Gbps, but your VR NICs are 100 Mbps, you will be limited to the slowest
> >> nic in the whole path/chain - 100 Mbps.
> >>
> >> OK
> >>
> >>
> >> Regards,
> >> Andrija
> >> -
> >>
> >> On Thu, 23 Apr 2020 at 20:34, Olivier Guin <ol...@gmail.com>
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >>> Hello,
> >>>
> >>> Some news :
> >>>
> >>> from VM to SRV :
> >>>
> >>> [root@centos7 centos]# iperf3 -c 200.13.XXX.XXX -p5001
> >>> Connecting to host 200.13.XXX.XXX, port 5001
> >>> [ 4] local 10.0.1.42 port 56190 connected to 200.13.XXX.XXX port 5001
> >>> [ ID] Interval Transfer Bandwidth Retr Cwnd
> >>> [ 4] 0.00-1.00 sec 12.9 MBytes 108 Mbits/sec 77 55.1 KBytes
> >>> [ 4] 1.00-2.00 sec 11.9 MBytes 100 Mbits/sec 51 45.2 KBytes
> >>> [ 4] 2.00-3.00 sec 9.96 MBytes 83.6 Mbits/sec 36 28.3 KBytes
> >>> [ 4] 3.00-4.00 sec 9.37 MBytes 78.6 Mbits/sec 33 25.5 KBytes
> >>> [ 4] 4.00-5.00 sec 11.1 MBytes 93.5 Mbits/sec 24 50.9 KBytes
> >>> [ 4] 5.00-6.00 sec 11.2 MBytes 94.2 Mbits/sec 24 82.0 KBytes
> >>> [ 4] 6.00-7.07 sec 12.9 MBytes 101 Mbits/sec 38 143 KBytes
> >>> [ 4] 7.07-8.07 sec 9.03 MBytes 75.2 Mbits/sec 13 123 KBytes
> >>> [ 4] 8.07-9.00 sec 12.5 MBytes 113 Mbits/sec 24 103 KBytes
> >>> [ 4] 9.00-10.06 sec 13.6 MBytes 107 Mbits/sec 98 140 KBytes
> >>> - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
> >>> [ ID] Interval Transfer Bandwidth Retr
> >>> [ 4] 0.00-10.06 sec 114 MBytes 95.4 Mbits/sec 418
> >>> sender
> >>> [ 4] 0.00-10.06 sec 114 MBytes 95.4 Mbits/sec
> >>> receiver
> >>>
> >>> from SRV to VM :
> >>>
> >>> [root@centos7 centos]# iperf3 -s -p 5001
> >>> -----------------------------------------------------------
> >>> Server listening on 5001
> >>> -----------------------------------------------------------
> >>> Accepted connection from 200.13.XXX.XXX, port 48782
> >>> [ 5] local 10.0.1.42 port 5001 connected to 200.13.XXX.XXX port 48784
> >>> [ ID] Interval Transfer Bandwidth
> >>> [ 5] 0.00-1.00 sec 7.95 MBytes 66.7 Mbits/sec
> >>> [ 5] 1.00-2.00 sec 10.6 MBytes 88.7 Mbits/sec
> >>> [ 5] 2.00-3.00 sec 0.00 Bytes 0.00 bits/sec
> >>> [ 5] 3.00-4.00 sec 0.00 Bytes 0.00 bits/sec
> >>> [ 5] 4.00-5.00 sec 0.00 Bytes 0.00 bits/sec
> >>> [ 5] 5.00-6.00 sec 0.00 Bytes 0.00 bits/sec
> >>> [ 5] 6.00-7.00 sec 0.00 Bytes 0.00 bits/sec
> >>> [ 5] 7.00-8.00 sec 0.00 Bytes 0.00 bits/sec
> >>> [ 5] 8.00-9.00 sec 0.00 Bytes 0.00 bits/sec
> >>> [ 5] 9.00-10.00 sec 0.00 Bytes 0.00 bits/sec
> >>> [ 5] 10.00-11.00 sec 0.00 Bytes 0.00 bits/sec
> >>> [ 5] 11.00-11.52 sec 0.00 Bytes 0.00 bits/sec
> >>> - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
> >>> [ ID] Interval Transfer Bandwidth
> >>> [ 5] 0.00-11.52 sec 0.00 Bytes 0.00 bits/sec
> sender
> >>> [ 5] 0.00-11.52 sec 18.5 MBytes 13.5 Mbits/sec
> >>> receiver
> >>>
> >>> Regards,
> >>>
> >>> Olivier
> >>>
> >>>
> >> --
> >>
> >> Andrija Panić
> >>
> >>
>
--
Andrija Panić
Re: Network problem Cloudstack 4.13 Xen 6.5 Linux VM [URGENT] Mix Xen
7
Posted by Olivier GUIN <ol...@gmail.com>.
Hi Andrija,
You wrote that there would be my CPU / RAM ratio which would cause the
throttled on my interface.
What would be the right CPU / RAM ratio?
If you have a recommendation.
I think my problem comes from there ..
I made a VM with 4GB RAM and 4 vCPU at 2Ghz and it works very well!
(Linux/Windows)
Cheers,
Olivier
Le 23/04/2020 à 17:33, Andrija Panic a écrit :
> (mon français n'est pas si bon) - but if that is a physical server - than
> it's a valid test - beside the traffic will go through the VR (from VM via
> VR to that external host) - here you have NAT over relatively slow VR
> (CPU/RAM) and over the throttled interface most probably.
>
> In general, you should not keep mixed XS versions (whatever is true for
> XenServer alone, irrelevant of the CloudStack), as 7.x is a big difference
> to 6.5 and i.e. VM live migrations will not work (and I'm sure many other
> things, possibly)
>
> That being said, make sure to TEST the upgrade (pool master, then slaves,
> then see how to reconnect hosts to ACS, etc, etc) - if this is your test
> env - better start from scratch.
>
> 7.1 LTSR is recommended over 7.0 any day.
>
> Cheers
> Andrija
>
> On Thu, 23 Apr 2020 at 22:22, Olivier GUIN <ol...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Hi Andrija,
>>
>> Thank for your anwser ...
>>
>> 1) My Cloudstack is 4.13
>>
>> 2) Can I mix a version of xen 6.5 and xen 7 in the same cluster? (I think
>> I cannot move a VM from one cluster to another)
>>
>> 3) 200.13.xxx.xxx est un de mes serveurs sur mon réseau physique
>>
>> I think the problem comes from my service offerings
>>
>> I keep looking ...
>>
>> But I think upgrading my Xen servers from 6.5 to 7 is a good idea.
>>
>> Point 2 is important !
>>
>> Regards,
>>
>> Olivier
>> Le 23/04/2020 à 16:02, Andrija Panic a écrit :
>>
>> Hi Olivier,
>>
>> Upgrade to 4.13 should not be a problem here. I would suggest:
>>
>>
>> - checking traffic shaping on XenServer side - to confirm what is/is not
>> in place (we don't know your network offerings/compute offerings network
>> rates and such)
>> - Confirm VM/drivers used inside VMs are all up to date (6.5 is an ancient
>> thing, not supported any more in ACS 4.14 that will be out soon)
>>
>>
>> You are doing: iperf3 -c 200.13.XXX.XXX -p5001
>>
>> Why are you connecting to the IP of the VR? What kind of testing is this
>> supposed to be/show what?
>>
>>
>>
>> Why not starting iperf server on Centos 7 and connect to it from Windows
>> 2012 (and the other way around)?
>> This traffic is NOT going over the virtual router, but just via the same
>> "network" on XS.
>>
>> I'll try ok
>>
>>
>> Alternatively, you can deploy VPC (multiple isolated networks behind a VR)
>> - and have VM1 in network1, VM2 in network2 - and do iperf between them
>> (traffic router via VR) - here keep in mind even if your VM's NIC are
>> 1Gbps, but your VR NICs are 100 Mbps, you will be limited to the slowest
>> nic in the whole path/chain - 100 Mbps.
>>
>> OK
>>
>>
>> Regards,
>> Andrija
>> -
>>
>> On Thu, 23 Apr 2020 at 20:34, Olivier Guin <ol...@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Hello,
>>>
>>> Some news :
>>>
>>> from VM to SRV :
>>>
>>> [root@centos7 centos]# iperf3 -c 200.13.XXX.XXX -p5001
>>> Connecting to host 200.13.XXX.XXX, port 5001
>>> [ 4] local 10.0.1.42 port 56190 connected to 200.13.XXX.XXX port 5001
>>> [ ID] Interval Transfer Bandwidth Retr Cwnd
>>> [ 4] 0.00-1.00 sec 12.9 MBytes 108 Mbits/sec 77 55.1 KBytes
>>> [ 4] 1.00-2.00 sec 11.9 MBytes 100 Mbits/sec 51 45.2 KBytes
>>> [ 4] 2.00-3.00 sec 9.96 MBytes 83.6 Mbits/sec 36 28.3 KBytes
>>> [ 4] 3.00-4.00 sec 9.37 MBytes 78.6 Mbits/sec 33 25.5 KBytes
>>> [ 4] 4.00-5.00 sec 11.1 MBytes 93.5 Mbits/sec 24 50.9 KBytes
>>> [ 4] 5.00-6.00 sec 11.2 MBytes 94.2 Mbits/sec 24 82.0 KBytes
>>> [ 4] 6.00-7.07 sec 12.9 MBytes 101 Mbits/sec 38 143 KBytes
>>> [ 4] 7.07-8.07 sec 9.03 MBytes 75.2 Mbits/sec 13 123 KBytes
>>> [ 4] 8.07-9.00 sec 12.5 MBytes 113 Mbits/sec 24 103 KBytes
>>> [ 4] 9.00-10.06 sec 13.6 MBytes 107 Mbits/sec 98 140 KBytes
>>> - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
>>> [ ID] Interval Transfer Bandwidth Retr
>>> [ 4] 0.00-10.06 sec 114 MBytes 95.4 Mbits/sec 418
>>> sender
>>> [ 4] 0.00-10.06 sec 114 MBytes 95.4 Mbits/sec
>>> receiver
>>>
>>> from SRV to VM :
>>>
>>> [root@centos7 centos]# iperf3 -s -p 5001
>>> -----------------------------------------------------------
>>> Server listening on 5001
>>> -----------------------------------------------------------
>>> Accepted connection from 200.13.XXX.XXX, port 48782
>>> [ 5] local 10.0.1.42 port 5001 connected to 200.13.XXX.XXX port 48784
>>> [ ID] Interval Transfer Bandwidth
>>> [ 5] 0.00-1.00 sec 7.95 MBytes 66.7 Mbits/sec
>>> [ 5] 1.00-2.00 sec 10.6 MBytes 88.7 Mbits/sec
>>> [ 5] 2.00-3.00 sec 0.00 Bytes 0.00 bits/sec
>>> [ 5] 3.00-4.00 sec 0.00 Bytes 0.00 bits/sec
>>> [ 5] 4.00-5.00 sec 0.00 Bytes 0.00 bits/sec
>>> [ 5] 5.00-6.00 sec 0.00 Bytes 0.00 bits/sec
>>> [ 5] 6.00-7.00 sec 0.00 Bytes 0.00 bits/sec
>>> [ 5] 7.00-8.00 sec 0.00 Bytes 0.00 bits/sec
>>> [ 5] 8.00-9.00 sec 0.00 Bytes 0.00 bits/sec
>>> [ 5] 9.00-10.00 sec 0.00 Bytes 0.00 bits/sec
>>> [ 5] 10.00-11.00 sec 0.00 Bytes 0.00 bits/sec
>>> [ 5] 11.00-11.52 sec 0.00 Bytes 0.00 bits/sec
>>> - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
>>> [ ID] Interval Transfer Bandwidth
>>> [ 5] 0.00-11.52 sec 0.00 Bytes 0.00 bits/sec sender
>>> [ 5] 0.00-11.52 sec 18.5 MBytes 13.5 Mbits/sec
>>> receiver
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>>
>>> Olivier
>>>
>>>
>> --
>>
>> Andrija Panić
>>
>>
Re: Network problem Cloudstack 4.13 Xen 6.5 Linux VM [URGENT] Mix Xen 7
Posted by Andrija Panic <an...@gmail.com>.
(mon français n'est pas si bon) - but if that is a physical server - than
it's a valid test - beside the traffic will go through the VR (from VM via
VR to that external host) - here you have NAT over relatively slow VR
(CPU/RAM) and over the throttled interface most probably.
In general, you should not keep mixed XS versions (whatever is true for
XenServer alone, irrelevant of the CloudStack), as 7.x is a big difference
to 6.5 and i.e. VM live migrations will not work (and I'm sure many other
things, possibly)
That being said, make sure to TEST the upgrade (pool master, then slaves,
then see how to reconnect hosts to ACS, etc, etc) - if this is your test
env - better start from scratch.
7.1 LTSR is recommended over 7.0 any day.
Cheers
Andrija
On Thu, 23 Apr 2020 at 22:22, Olivier GUIN <ol...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi Andrija,
>
> Thank for your anwser ...
>
> 1) My Cloudstack is 4.13
>
> 2) Can I mix a version of xen 6.5 and xen 7 in the same cluster? (I think
> I cannot move a VM from one cluster to another)
>
> 3) 200.13.xxx.xxx est un de mes serveurs sur mon réseau physique
>
> I think the problem comes from my service offerings
>
> I keep looking ...
>
> But I think upgrading my Xen servers from 6.5 to 7 is a good idea.
>
> Point 2 is important !
>
> Regards,
>
> Olivier
> Le 23/04/2020 à 16:02, Andrija Panic a écrit :
>
> Hi Olivier,
>
> Upgrade to 4.13 should not be a problem here. I would suggest:
>
>
> - checking traffic shaping on XenServer side - to confirm what is/is not
> in place (we don't know your network offerings/compute offerings network
> rates and such)
> - Confirm VM/drivers used inside VMs are all up to date (6.5 is an ancient
> thing, not supported any more in ACS 4.14 that will be out soon)
>
>
> You are doing: iperf3 -c 200.13.XXX.XXX -p5001
>
> Why are you connecting to the IP of the VR? What kind of testing is this
> supposed to be/show what?
>
>
>
> Why not starting iperf server on Centos 7 and connect to it from Windows
> 2012 (and the other way around)?
> This traffic is NOT going over the virtual router, but just via the same
> "network" on XS.
>
> I'll try ok
>
>
> Alternatively, you can deploy VPC (multiple isolated networks behind a VR)
> - and have VM1 in network1, VM2 in network2 - and do iperf between them
> (traffic router via VR) - here keep in mind even if your VM's NIC are
> 1Gbps, but your VR NICs are 100 Mbps, you will be limited to the slowest
> nic in the whole path/chain - 100 Mbps.
>
> OK
>
>
> Regards,
> Andrija
> -
>
> On Thu, 23 Apr 2020 at 20:34, Olivier Guin <ol...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Hello,
>>
>> Some news :
>>
>> from VM to SRV :
>>
>> [root@centos7 centos]# iperf3 -c 200.13.XXX.XXX -p5001
>> Connecting to host 200.13.XXX.XXX, port 5001
>> [ 4] local 10.0.1.42 port 56190 connected to 200.13.XXX.XXX port 5001
>> [ ID] Interval Transfer Bandwidth Retr Cwnd
>> [ 4] 0.00-1.00 sec 12.9 MBytes 108 Mbits/sec 77 55.1 KBytes
>> [ 4] 1.00-2.00 sec 11.9 MBytes 100 Mbits/sec 51 45.2 KBytes
>> [ 4] 2.00-3.00 sec 9.96 MBytes 83.6 Mbits/sec 36 28.3 KBytes
>> [ 4] 3.00-4.00 sec 9.37 MBytes 78.6 Mbits/sec 33 25.5 KBytes
>> [ 4] 4.00-5.00 sec 11.1 MBytes 93.5 Mbits/sec 24 50.9 KBytes
>> [ 4] 5.00-6.00 sec 11.2 MBytes 94.2 Mbits/sec 24 82.0 KBytes
>> [ 4] 6.00-7.07 sec 12.9 MBytes 101 Mbits/sec 38 143 KBytes
>> [ 4] 7.07-8.07 sec 9.03 MBytes 75.2 Mbits/sec 13 123 KBytes
>> [ 4] 8.07-9.00 sec 12.5 MBytes 113 Mbits/sec 24 103 KBytes
>> [ 4] 9.00-10.06 sec 13.6 MBytes 107 Mbits/sec 98 140 KBytes
>> - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
>> [ ID] Interval Transfer Bandwidth Retr
>> [ 4] 0.00-10.06 sec 114 MBytes 95.4 Mbits/sec 418
>> sender
>> [ 4] 0.00-10.06 sec 114 MBytes 95.4 Mbits/sec
>> receiver
>>
>> from SRV to VM :
>>
>> [root@centos7 centos]# iperf3 -s -p 5001
>> -----------------------------------------------------------
>> Server listening on 5001
>> -----------------------------------------------------------
>> Accepted connection from 200.13.XXX.XXX, port 48782
>> [ 5] local 10.0.1.42 port 5001 connected to 200.13.XXX.XXX port 48784
>> [ ID] Interval Transfer Bandwidth
>> [ 5] 0.00-1.00 sec 7.95 MBytes 66.7 Mbits/sec
>> [ 5] 1.00-2.00 sec 10.6 MBytes 88.7 Mbits/sec
>> [ 5] 2.00-3.00 sec 0.00 Bytes 0.00 bits/sec
>> [ 5] 3.00-4.00 sec 0.00 Bytes 0.00 bits/sec
>> [ 5] 4.00-5.00 sec 0.00 Bytes 0.00 bits/sec
>> [ 5] 5.00-6.00 sec 0.00 Bytes 0.00 bits/sec
>> [ 5] 6.00-7.00 sec 0.00 Bytes 0.00 bits/sec
>> [ 5] 7.00-8.00 sec 0.00 Bytes 0.00 bits/sec
>> [ 5] 8.00-9.00 sec 0.00 Bytes 0.00 bits/sec
>> [ 5] 9.00-10.00 sec 0.00 Bytes 0.00 bits/sec
>> [ 5] 10.00-11.00 sec 0.00 Bytes 0.00 bits/sec
>> [ 5] 11.00-11.52 sec 0.00 Bytes 0.00 bits/sec
>> - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
>> [ ID] Interval Transfer Bandwidth
>> [ 5] 0.00-11.52 sec 0.00 Bytes 0.00 bits/sec sender
>> [ 5] 0.00-11.52 sec 18.5 MBytes 13.5 Mbits/sec
>> receiver
>>
>> Regards,
>>
>> Olivier
>>
>>
>
> --
>
> Andrija Panić
>
>
--
Andrija Panić
Re: Network problem Cloudstack 4.13 Xen 6.5 Linux VM [URGENT] Mix Xen
7
Posted by Olivier GUIN <ol...@gmail.com>.
Hi Andrija,
Thank for your anwser ...
1) My Cloudstack is 4.13
2) Can I mix a version of xen 6.5 and xen 7 in the same cluster? (I
think I cannot move a VM from one cluster to another)
3) 200.13.xxx.xxx est un de mes serveurs sur mon réseau physique
I think the problem comes from my service offerings
I keep looking ...
But I think upgrading my Xen servers from 6.5 to 7 is a good idea.
Point 2 is important !
Regards,
Olivier
Le 23/04/2020 à 16:02, Andrija Panic a écrit :
> Hi Olivier,
>
> Upgrade to 4.13 should not be a problem here. I would suggest:
>
> - checking traffic shaping on XenServer side - to confirm what is/is
> not in place (we don't know your network offerings/compute
> offerings network rates and such)
> - Confirm VM/drivers used inside VMs are all up to date (6.5 is an
> ancient thing, not supported any more in ACS 4.14 that will be out soon)
>
> You are doing: iperf3 -c 200.13.XXX.XXX -p5001
>
> Why are you connecting to the IP of the VR? What kind of testing is
> this supposed to be/show what?
>
> Why not starting iperf server on Centos 7 and connect to it from
> Windows 2012 (and the other way around)?
> This traffic is NOT going over the virtual router, but just via the
> same "network" on XS.
I'll try ok
>
> Alternatively, you can deploy VPC (multiple isolated networks behind a
> VR) - and have VM1 in network1, VM2 in network2 - and do iperf between
> them (traffic router via VR) - here keep in mind even if your VM's NIC
> are 1Gbps, but your VR NICs are 100 Mbps, you will be limited to the
> slowest nic in the whole path/chain - 100 Mbps.
OK
>
> Regards,
> Andrija
> -
>
> On Thu, 23 Apr 2020 at 20:34, Olivier Guin <olivier.guin83@gmail.com
> <ma...@gmail.com>> wrote:
>
> Hello,
>
> Some news :
>
> from VM to SRV :
>
> [root@centos7 centos]# iperf3 -c 200.13.XXX.XXX -p5001
> Connecting to host 200.13.XXX.XXX, port 5001
> [ 4] local 10.0.1.42 port 56190 connected to 200.13.XXX.XXX port 5001
> [ ID] Interval Transfer Bandwidth Retr Cwnd
> [ 4] 0.00-1.00 sec 12.9 MBytes 108 Mbits/sec 77 55.1 KBytes
> [ 4] 1.00-2.00 sec 11.9 MBytes 100 Mbits/sec 51 45.2 KBytes
> [ 4] 2.00-3.00 sec 9.96 MBytes 83.6 Mbits/sec 36 28.3 KBytes
> [ 4] 3.00-4.00 sec 9.37 MBytes 78.6 Mbits/sec 33 25.5 KBytes
> [ 4] 4.00-5.00 sec 11.1 MBytes 93.5 Mbits/sec 24 50.9 KBytes
> [ 4] 5.00-6.00 sec 11.2 MBytes 94.2 Mbits/sec 24 82.0 KBytes
> [ 4] 6.00-7.07 sec 12.9 MBytes 101 Mbits/sec 38 143 KBytes
> [ 4] 7.07-8.07 sec 9.03 MBytes 75.2 Mbits/sec 13 123 KBytes
> [ 4] 8.07-9.00 sec 12.5 MBytes 113 Mbits/sec 24 103 KBytes
> [ 4] 9.00-10.06 sec 13.6 MBytes 107 Mbits/sec 98 140 KBytes
> - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
> [ ID] Interval Transfer Bandwidth Retr
> [ 4] 0.00-10.06 sec 114 MBytes 95.4 Mbits/sec
> 418 sender
> [ 4] 0.00-10.06 sec 114 MBytes 95.4
> Mbits/sec receiver
>
> from SRV to VM :
>
> [root@centos7 centos]# iperf3 -s -p 5001
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> Server listening on 5001
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> Accepted connection from 200.13.XXX.XXX, port 48782
> [ 5] local 10.0.1.42 port 5001 connected to 200.13.XXX.XXX port 48784
> [ ID] Interval Transfer Bandwidth
> [ 5] 0.00-1.00 sec 7.95 MBytes 66.7 Mbits/sec
> [ 5] 1.00-2.00 sec 10.6 MBytes 88.7 Mbits/sec
> [ 5] 2.00-3.00 sec 0.00 Bytes 0.00 bits/sec
> [ 5] 3.00-4.00 sec 0.00 Bytes 0.00 bits/sec
> [ 5] 4.00-5.00 sec 0.00 Bytes 0.00 bits/sec
> [ 5] 5.00-6.00 sec 0.00 Bytes 0.00 bits/sec
> [ 5] 6.00-7.00 sec 0.00 Bytes 0.00 bits/sec
> [ 5] 7.00-8.00 sec 0.00 Bytes 0.00 bits/sec
> [ 5] 8.00-9.00 sec 0.00 Bytes 0.00 bits/sec
> [ 5] 9.00-10.00 sec 0.00 Bytes 0.00 bits/sec
> [ 5] 10.00-11.00 sec 0.00 Bytes 0.00 bits/sec
> [ 5] 11.00-11.52 sec 0.00 Bytes 0.00 bits/sec
> - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
> [ ID] Interval Transfer Bandwidth
> [ 5] 0.00-11.52 sec 0.00 Bytes 0.00
> bits/sec sender
> [ 5] 0.00-11.52 sec 18.5 MBytes 13.5
> Mbits/sec receiver
>
> Regards,
>
> Olivier
>
>
>
>
> --
>
> Andrija Panić
Re: Network problem Cloudstack 4.13 Xen 6.5 Linux VM [URGENT]
Posted by Andrija Panic <an...@gmail.com>.
Hi Olivier,
Upgrade to 4.13 should not be a problem here. I would suggest:
- checking traffic shaping on XenServer side - to confirm what is/is not in
place (we don't know your network offerings/compute offerings network rates
and such)
- Confirm VM/drivers used inside VMs are all up to date (6.5 is an ancient
thing, not supported any more in ACS 4.14 that will be out soon)
You are doing: iperf3 -c 200.13.XXX.XXX -p5001
Why are you connecting to the IP of the VR? What kind of testing is this
supposed to be/show what?
Why not starting iperf server on Centos 7 and connect to it from Windows
2012 (and the other way around)?
This traffic is NOT going over the virtual router, but just via the same
"network" on XS.
Alternatively, you can deploy VPC (multiple isolated networks behind a VR)
- and have VM1 in network1, VM2 in network2 - and do iperf between them
(traffic router via VR) - here keep in mind even if your VM's NIC are
1Gbps, but your VR NICs are 100 Mbps, you will be limited to the slowest
nic in the whole path/chain - 100 Mbps.
Regards,
Andrija
-
On Thu, 23 Apr 2020 at 20:34, Olivier Guin <ol...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hello,
>
> Some news :
>
> from VM to SRV :
>
> [root@centos7 centos]# iperf3 -c 200.13.XXX.XXX -p5001
> Connecting to host 200.13.XXX.XXX, port 5001
> [ 4] local 10.0.1.42 port 56190 connected to 200.13.XXX.XXX port 5001
> [ ID] Interval Transfer Bandwidth Retr Cwnd
> [ 4] 0.00-1.00 sec 12.9 MBytes 108 Mbits/sec 77 55.1 KBytes
> [ 4] 1.00-2.00 sec 11.9 MBytes 100 Mbits/sec 51 45.2 KBytes
> [ 4] 2.00-3.00 sec 9.96 MBytes 83.6 Mbits/sec 36 28.3 KBytes
> [ 4] 3.00-4.00 sec 9.37 MBytes 78.6 Mbits/sec 33 25.5 KBytes
> [ 4] 4.00-5.00 sec 11.1 MBytes 93.5 Mbits/sec 24 50.9 KBytes
> [ 4] 5.00-6.00 sec 11.2 MBytes 94.2 Mbits/sec 24 82.0 KBytes
> [ 4] 6.00-7.07 sec 12.9 MBytes 101 Mbits/sec 38 143 KBytes
> [ 4] 7.07-8.07 sec 9.03 MBytes 75.2 Mbits/sec 13 123 KBytes
> [ 4] 8.07-9.00 sec 12.5 MBytes 113 Mbits/sec 24 103 KBytes
> [ 4] 9.00-10.06 sec 13.6 MBytes 107 Mbits/sec 98 140 KBytes
> - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
> [ ID] Interval Transfer Bandwidth Retr
> [ 4] 0.00-10.06 sec 114 MBytes 95.4 Mbits/sec 418
> sender
> [ 4] 0.00-10.06 sec 114 MBytes 95.4 Mbits/sec
> receiver
>
> from SRV to VM :
>
> [root@centos7 centos]# iperf3 -s -p 5001
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> Server listening on 5001
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> Accepted connection from 200.13.XXX.XXX, port 48782
> [ 5] local 10.0.1.42 port 5001 connected to 200.13.XXX.XXX port 48784
> [ ID] Interval Transfer Bandwidth
> [ 5] 0.00-1.00 sec 7.95 MBytes 66.7 Mbits/sec
> [ 5] 1.00-2.00 sec 10.6 MBytes 88.7 Mbits/sec
> [ 5] 2.00-3.00 sec 0.00 Bytes 0.00 bits/sec
> [ 5] 3.00-4.00 sec 0.00 Bytes 0.00 bits/sec
> [ 5] 4.00-5.00 sec 0.00 Bytes 0.00 bits/sec
> [ 5] 5.00-6.00 sec 0.00 Bytes 0.00 bits/sec
> [ 5] 6.00-7.00 sec 0.00 Bytes 0.00 bits/sec
> [ 5] 7.00-8.00 sec 0.00 Bytes 0.00 bits/sec
> [ 5] 8.00-9.00 sec 0.00 Bytes 0.00 bits/sec
> [ 5] 9.00-10.00 sec 0.00 Bytes 0.00 bits/sec
> [ 5] 10.00-11.00 sec 0.00 Bytes 0.00 bits/sec
> [ 5] 11.00-11.52 sec 0.00 Bytes 0.00 bits/sec
> - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
> [ ID] Interval Transfer Bandwidth
> [ 5] 0.00-11.52 sec 0.00 Bytes 0.00 bits/sec sender
> [ 5] 0.00-11.52 sec 18.5 MBytes 13.5 Mbits/sec
> receiver
>
> Regards,
>
> Olivier
> Le 23/04/2020 à 08:41, Olivier Guin a écrit :
>
> Hello Vivek,
>
> Thank you for your answer.
> There is Qos on the VR and VM interfaces but I don't know who manages it,
> Cloudstack, XenCenter or Xen Server?
> Other operation that I made:
> 1) New installation Windows 2012, everything is OK good speed
> 2) New CentOS 7 installation Very poor flow ... fast at first and more
> flow thereafter.
> 3) New CentOS7 installation on the same Network as Windows 2012, same
> result no speed ... ! but vm windows OK !
> | --10.0.1.193--
> VM Windows 2012 (OK)
> Internet --- (200.13.XXX.XXX)--VR--(10.0.1.1)
> | --10.0.1.42 --
> VM CentOS7 (NOK)
> Conclusion, it must come from taking into account the network under Linux
> I suppose ... and that since the migration in version 4.13 ...
>
> I don't understand !
>
> If anyone ever had this problem ...
> Thank you
>
> Olivier
>
>
> Le 22/04/2020 à 12:02, Vivek Kumar a écrit :
>
> Hello Olivier,
>
> You can check QoS setting on the VIF on the VR which is connected to the network which also connects to your VM. As far as my knowledge is concerned, XenServer Applied QoS for outgoing traffic only not for Incoming traffic, So it might be possible that traffic sending out to the VM has some QoS limit. You can check that.
>
>
>
> Vivek Kumar
> Manager - Cloud & DevOps
> IndiQus Technologies
> 24*7 O +91 11 4055 1411 | M +91 7503460090 www.indiqus.com <http://indiqus.com/> <http://indiqus.com/>
>
> This message is intended only for the use of the individual or entity to which it is addressed and may contain information that is confidential and/or privileged. If you are not the intended recipient please delete the original message and any copy of it from your computer system. You are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited unless proper authorization has been obtained for such action. If you have received this communication in error, please notify the sender immediately. Although IndiQus attempts to sweep e-mail and attachments for viruses, it does not guarantee that both are virus-free and accepts no liability for any damage sustained as a result of viruses.
>
>
> On 22-Apr-2020, at 5:16 PM, Olivier Guin <ol...@gmail.com> <ol...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Hello
>
>
> Cloudstack 4.13, Xen 6.5
>
> I would like to know if there is a command to 'clean up' in the Networking tab unused networks in XenCenter !
> Can I delete networks with a Link Status <None>? in the XenCenter.
> I have no traffic on my VMs, but on virtual routers yes.
> Ex: From the router:
> wget http://xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx/x86_64/CentOS-7-x86_64-Minimal-1908.iso <http://xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx/x86_64/CentOS-7-x86_64-Minimal-1908.iso> <http://xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx/x86_64/CentOS-7-x86_64-Minimal-1908.iso> -> 200 Mbps
> From the vm: 15 kbps!
> Do you have an idea, I think it's since the migration from 4.11 to 4.13!
> Thank you
>
> Olivier
> --
>
> Olivier GUIN
> Direction
> 05 94 31 02 44
>
>
>
> <jjhlnlgfioplaeoi.jpg>
> 513 ZI Collery 5
> 97300 CAYENNE
> <http://www.wayscom.com/> <http://www.wayscom.com/>www.wayscom.com <http://www.wayscom.com/> <http://www.wayscom.com/>
>
> --
>
> [image: Marsouins]
> *Olivier GUIN ** GSM 0694 21 32 50*
>
>
>
> *E3 - M.F.1. (Moniteur Fédéral - FFESSM) MONITEUR NITROX CONFIRME
> Spécification Technicien Inspection Visuelle Spécification RIFA plongée*
>
>
> --
>
> [image: Marsouins]
> *Olivier GUIN ** GSM 0694 21 32 50*
>
>
>
> *E3 - M.F.1. (Moniteur Fédéral - FFESSM) MONITEUR NITROX CONFIRME
> Spécification Technicien Inspection Visuelle Spécification RIFA plongée*
>
>
>
--
Andrija Panić
Re: Network problem Cloudstack 4.13 Xen 6.5 Linux VM [URGENT]
Posted by Olivier Guin <ol...@gmail.com>.
Hello,
Some news :
from VM to SRV :
[root@centos7 centos]# iperf3 -c 200.13.XXX.XXX -p5001
Connecting to host 200.13.XXX.XXX, port 5001
[ 4] local 10.0.1.42 port 56190 connected to 200.13.XXX.XXX port 5001
[ ID] Interval Transfer Bandwidth Retr Cwnd
[ 4] 0.00-1.00 sec 12.9 MBytes 108 Mbits/sec 77 55.1 KBytes
[ 4] 1.00-2.00 sec 11.9 MBytes 100 Mbits/sec 51 45.2 KBytes
[ 4] 2.00-3.00 sec 9.96 MBytes 83.6 Mbits/sec 36 28.3 KBytes
[ 4] 3.00-4.00 sec 9.37 MBytes 78.6 Mbits/sec 33 25.5 KBytes
[ 4] 4.00-5.00 sec 11.1 MBytes 93.5 Mbits/sec 24 50.9 KBytes
[ 4] 5.00-6.00 sec 11.2 MBytes 94.2 Mbits/sec 24 82.0 KBytes
[ 4] 6.00-7.07 sec 12.9 MBytes 101 Mbits/sec 38 143 KBytes
[ 4] 7.07-8.07 sec 9.03 MBytes 75.2 Mbits/sec 13 123 KBytes
[ 4] 8.07-9.00 sec 12.5 MBytes 113 Mbits/sec 24 103 KBytes
[ 4] 9.00-10.06 sec 13.6 MBytes 107 Mbits/sec 98 140 KBytes
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
[ ID] Interval Transfer Bandwidth Retr
[ 4] 0.00-10.06 sec 114 MBytes 95.4 Mbits/sec 418 sender
[ 4] 0.00-10.06 sec 114 MBytes 95.4 Mbits/sec
receiver
from SRV to VM :
[root@centos7 centos]# iperf3 -s -p 5001
-----------------------------------------------------------
Server listening on 5001
-----------------------------------------------------------
Accepted connection from 200.13.XXX.XXX, port 48782
[ 5] local 10.0.1.42 port 5001 connected to 200.13.XXX.XXX port 48784
[ ID] Interval Transfer Bandwidth
[ 5] 0.00-1.00 sec 7.95 MBytes 66.7 Mbits/sec
[ 5] 1.00-2.00 sec 10.6 MBytes 88.7 Mbits/sec
[ 5] 2.00-3.00 sec 0.00 Bytes 0.00 bits/sec
[ 5] 3.00-4.00 sec 0.00 Bytes 0.00 bits/sec
[ 5] 4.00-5.00 sec 0.00 Bytes 0.00 bits/sec
[ 5] 5.00-6.00 sec 0.00 Bytes 0.00 bits/sec
[ 5] 6.00-7.00 sec 0.00 Bytes 0.00 bits/sec
[ 5] 7.00-8.00 sec 0.00 Bytes 0.00 bits/sec
[ 5] 8.00-9.00 sec 0.00 Bytes 0.00 bits/sec
[ 5] 9.00-10.00 sec 0.00 Bytes 0.00 bits/sec
[ 5] 10.00-11.00 sec 0.00 Bytes 0.00 bits/sec
[ 5] 11.00-11.52 sec 0.00 Bytes 0.00 bits/sec
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
[ ID] Interval Transfer Bandwidth
[ 5] 0.00-11.52 sec 0.00 Bytes 0.00 bits/sec sender
[ 5] 0.00-11.52 sec 18.5 MBytes 13.5 Mbits/sec
receiver
Regards,
Olivier
Le 23/04/2020 à 08:41, Olivier Guin a écrit :
> Hello Vivek,
>
> Thank you for your answer.
> There is Qos on the VR and VM interfaces but I don't know who manages
> it, Cloudstack, XenCenter or Xen Server?
> Other operation that I made:
> 1) New installation Windows 2012, everything is OK good speed
> 2) New CentOS 7 installation Very poor flow ... fast at first and more
> flow thereafter.
> 3) New CentOS7 installation on the same Network as Windows 2012, same
> result no speed ... ! but vm windows OK !
> |
> --10.0.1.193-- VM Windows 2012 (OK)
> Internet --- (200.13.XXX.XXX)--VR--(10.0.1.1)
> | --10.0.1.42
> -- VM CentOS7 (NOK)
> Conclusion, it must come from taking into account the network under
> Linux I suppose ... and that since the migration in version 4.13 ...
>
> I don't understand !
>
> If anyone ever had this problem ...
>
> Thank you
>
> Olivier
>
>
> Le 22/04/2020 à 12:02, Vivek Kumar a écrit :
>> Hello Olivier,
>>
>> You can check QoS setting on the VIF on the VR which is connected to the network which also connects to your VM. As far as my knowledge is concerned, XenServer Applied QoS for outgoing traffic only not for Incoming traffic, So it might be possible that traffic sending out to the VM has some QoS limit. You can check that.
>>
>>
>>
>> Vivek Kumar
>> Manager - Cloud & DevOps
>> IndiQus Technologies
>> 24*7 O +91 11 4055 1411 | M +91 7503460090
>> www.indiqus.com <http://indiqus.com/>
>>
>> This message is intended only for the use of the individual or entity to which it is addressed and may contain information that is confidential and/or privileged. If you are not the intended recipient please delete the original message and any copy of it from your computer system. You are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited unless proper authorization has been obtained for such action. If you have received this communication in error, please notify the sender immediately. Although IndiQus attempts to sweep e-mail and attachments for viruses, it does not guarantee that both are virus-free and accepts no liability for any damage sustained as a result of viruses.
>>
>>> On 22-Apr-2020, at 5:16 PM, Olivier Guin<ol...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> Hello
>>>
>>>
>>> Cloudstack 4.13, Xen 6.5
>>>
>>> I would like to know if there is a command to 'clean up' in the Networking tab unused networks in XenCenter !
>>> Can I delete networks with a Link Status <None>? in the XenCenter.
>>> I have no traffic on my VMs, but on virtual routers yes.
>>> Ex: From the router:
>>> wgethttp://xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx/x86_64/CentOS-7-x86_64-Minimal-1908.iso <http://xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx/x86_64/CentOS-7-x86_64-Minimal-1908.iso> -> 200 Mbps
>>> From the vm: 15 kbps!
>>> Do you have an idea, I think it's since the migration from 4.11 to 4.13!
>>> Thank you
>>>
>>> Olivier
>>> --
>>>
>>> Olivier GUIN
>>> Direction
>>> 05 94 31 02 44
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> <jjhlnlgfioplaeoi.jpg>
>>> 513 ZI Collery 5
>>> 97300 CAYENNE
>>> <http://www.wayscom.com/>www.wayscom.com <http://www.wayscom.com/>
> --
>
> Marsouins */Olivier GUIN
> /*/ GSM 0694 21 32 50/
> /E3 - M.F.1. (Moniteur Fédéral - FFESSM)
> MONITEUR NITROX CONFIRME
> Spécification Technicien Inspection Visuelle
> Spécification RIFA plongée/
>
>
--
Marsouins */Olivier GUIN
/*/ GSM 0694 21 32 50/
/E3 - M.F.1. (Moniteur Fédéral - FFESSM)
MONITEUR NITROX CONFIRME
Spécification Technicien Inspection Visuelle
Spécification RIFA plongée/
Re: Network problem Cloudstack 4.13 Xen 6.5 Linux VM [URGENT]
Posted by Olivier Guin <ol...@gmail.com>.
Hello,
Can I downgrade from CS 4.13 to 4.11 ?
I've only one VM !
Regards,
Olivier
Le 23/04/2020 à 08:41, Olivier Guin a écrit :
> Hello Vivek,
>
> Thank you for your answer.
> There is Qos on the VR and VM interfaces but I don't know who manages
> it, Cloudstack, XenCenter or Xen Server?
> Other operation that I made:
> 1) New installation Windows 2012, everything is OK good speed
> 2) New CentOS 7 installation Very poor flow ... fast at first and more
> flow thereafter.
> 3) New CentOS7 installation on the same Network as Windows 2012, same
> result no speed ... ! but vm windows OK !
> |
> --10.0.1.193-- VM Windows 2012 (OK)
> Internet --- (200.13.XXX.XXX)--VR--(10.0.1.1)
> | --10.0.1.42
> -- VM CentOS7 (NOK)
> Conclusion, it must come from taking into account the network under
> Linux I suppose ... and that since the migration in version 4.13 ...
>
> I don't understand !
>
> If anyone ever had this problem ...
>
> Thank you
>
> Olivier
>
>
> Le 22/04/2020 à 12:02, Vivek Kumar a écrit :
>> Hello Olivier,
>>
>> You can check QoS setting on the VIF on the VR which is connected to the network which also connects to your VM. As far as my knowledge is concerned, XenServer Applied QoS for outgoing traffic only not for Incoming traffic, So it might be possible that traffic sending out to the VM has some QoS limit. You can check that.
>>
>>
>>
>> Vivek Kumar
>> Manager - Cloud & DevOps
>> IndiQus Technologies
>> 24*7 O +91 11 4055 1411 | M +91 7503460090
>> www.indiqus.com <http://indiqus.com/>
>>
>> This message is intended only for the use of the individual or entity to which it is addressed and may contain information that is confidential and/or privileged. If you are not the intended recipient please delete the original message and any copy of it from your computer system. You are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited unless proper authorization has been obtained for such action. If you have received this communication in error, please notify the sender immediately. Although IndiQus attempts to sweep e-mail and attachments for viruses, it does not guarantee that both are virus-free and accepts no liability for any damage sustained as a result of viruses.
>>
>>> On 22-Apr-2020, at 5:16 PM, Olivier Guin<ol...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> Hello
>>>
>>>
>>> Cloudstack 4.13, Xen 6.5
>>>
>>> I would like to know if there is a command to 'clean up' in the Networking tab unused networks in XenCenter !
>>> Can I delete networks with a Link Status <None>? in the XenCenter.
>>> I have no traffic on my VMs, but on virtual routers yes.
>>> Ex: From the router:
>>> wgethttp://xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx/x86_64/CentOS-7-x86_64-Minimal-1908.iso <http://xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx/x86_64/CentOS-7-x86_64-Minimal-1908.iso> -> 200 Mbps
>>> From the vm: 15 kbps!
>>> Do you have an idea, I think it's since the migration from 4.11 to 4.13!
>>> Thank you
>>>
>>> Olivier
>>> --
>>>
>>> Olivier GUIN
>>> Direction
>>> 05 94 31 02 44
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> <jjhlnlgfioplaeoi.jpg>
>>> 513 ZI Collery 5
>>> 97300 CAYENNE
>>> <http://www.wayscom.com/>www.wayscom.com <http://www.wayscom.com/>
> --
>
> Marsouins */Olivier GUIN
> /*/ GSM 0694 21 32 50/
> /E3 - M.F.1. (Moniteur Fédéral - FFESSM)
> MONITEUR NITROX CONFIRME
> Spécification Technicien Inspection Visuelle
> Spécification RIFA plongée/
>
>
--
Marsouins */Olivier GUIN
/*/ GSM 0694 21 32 50/
/E3 - M.F.1. (Moniteur Fédéral - FFESSM)
MONITEUR NITROX CONFIRME
Spécification Technicien Inspection Visuelle
Spécification RIFA plongée/