You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to issues@cloudstack.apache.org by "danny webb (JIRA)" <ji...@apache.org> on 2013/06/14 11:05:20 UTC

[jira] [Commented] (CLOUDSTACK-2008) guest network vlan tag chain issue

    [ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CLOUDSTACK-2008?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=13683225#comment-13683225 ] 

danny webb commented on CLOUDSTACK-2008:
----------------------------------------

ok, I have tried a new setup where the root bond0 device is now on a totally separate network.  The management is on a bond0.160 vlan tagged interface that I setup by hand.  And still the Virtual router / additional guest networks keep doing the vlan chaining.  The strange thing is the code works to create the initial bond / bridge for the public interface, ala:

cloudVirBr170		8000.0017a4770400	no		bond0.170
							vnet2

but as soon as it trys to deploy the Virtual router and this new guest network it messes it up:

cloudVirBr190		8000.0017a4770400	no		bond0.160.190
							vnet4

So there is something in the VR code or the deployment of guest networks that isn't quite right.  

here is a list of my network setup:

http://pastebin.com/9X34nXUv
                
> guest network vlan tag chain issue
> ----------------------------------
>
>                 Key: CLOUDSTACK-2008
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CLOUDSTACK-2008
>             Project: CloudStack
>          Issue Type: Bug
>      Security Level: Public(Anyone can view this level - this is the default.) 
>          Components: Network Controller
>    Affects Versions: 4.0.1
>         Environment: centos 6.4
> HP BL460 G1 
>            Reporter: danny webb
>            Priority: Minor
>
> Hi,
> I have setup a cloudstack instance where my "root" eth device is a vlan tagged bond0.60 (as the network I am on has a different default VLAN id than my test vlans).  
> so I am setup like this:
>     bond0.60 / cloudbr0 == management network / ip of box (bond0 == nothing)
>      
>     bond0.60  Link encap:Ethernet  HWaddr 00:17:A4:77:48:3C  
>               inet6 addr: fe80::217:a4ff:fe77:483c/64 Scope:Link
>               UP BROADCAST RUNNING MASTER MULTICAST  MTU:1500  Metric:1
>               RX packets:37189 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 frame:0
>               TX packets:34030 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 carrier:0
>               collisions:0 txqueuelen:0
>               RX bytes:4476334 (4.2 MiB)  TX bytes:31055747 (29.6 MiB)
>     cloudbr0  Link encap:Ethernet  HWaddr 00:17:A4:77:48:3C  
>               inet addr:172.18.102.8  Bcast:172.18.102.255  Mask:255.255.255.0
>               inet6 addr: fe80::217:a4ff:fe77:483c/64 Scope:Link
>               UP BROADCAST RUNNING MULTICAST  MTU:1500  Metric:1
>               RX packets:36531 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 frame:0
>               TX packets:32606 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 carrier:0
>               collisions:0 txqueuelen:0
>               RX bytes:4435824 (4.2 MiB)  TX bytes:30976056 (29.5 MiB)
>      
> when it went to setup a new guest network (with a vlan id of 80) it created it ontop of the bond0.60 like:
>      
>     bond0.60.80 Link encap:Ethernet  HWaddr 00:17:A4:77:48:3C  
>               inet6 addr: fe80::217:a4ff:fe77:483c/64 Scope:Link
>               UP BROADCAST RUNNING MASTER MULTICAST  MTU:1500  Metric:1
>               RX packets:0 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 frame:0
>               TX packets:70 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 carrier:0
>               collisions:0 txqueuelen:0
>               RX bytes:0 (0.0 b)  TX bytes:13777 (13.4 KiB)
>      
>     [root@slo-cnkvm004 ~]# brctl show
>     bridge name     bridge id               STP enabled     interfaces
>     cloud0          8000.000000000000       no             
>     cloudVirBr80            8000.0017a477483c       no              bond0.60.80
>      
> which doesn't seem to work and I am pretty sure is syntactically wrong.  I can't ping any guests that come up on that network.  When creating new devices it should I believe be creating them off of the base eth device (ie eth0, or bond0).

--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
If you think it was sent incorrectly, please contact your JIRA administrators
For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira