I've got a Xen domU running Centos 5.2 (dom0 is also Centos 5.2) with two NICs configured. Both NICs show up in the Xen hardware details display. Looking at dmesg output from rebooting the domU, I see both eth0 and eth1 appearing there. But network configuration only knows about eth0, the one that was installed originally (eth1 was added later). There's options to create another NIC in network configuration, but "xen virtual ethernet" isn't one of the hardware types I can choose, and choosing the default doesn't give me anything that works.
Should I try reinstalling the domU with the NIC already in place? But even if that works -- shouldn't it be possible to add a piece of hardware to a system and have it recognized on reboot?
Both NICs show up in the Xen hardware details display. Looking at dmesg output from rebooting the domU, I see both eth0 and eth1 appearing there.
By chance did you set the macs manually? Are they valid, look for a typo? I recall hearing about this behavior in lieu of that mistake.
jlc
On Mon, August 25, 2008 11:21, Joseph L. Casale wrote:
Both NICs show up in the Xen hardware details display. Looking at dmesg output from rebooting the domU, I see both eth0 and eth1 appearing there.
By chance did you set the macs manually? Are they valid, look for a typo? I recall hearing about this behavior in lieu of that mistake.
I set the second one manually; copied the first one and added one.
vif = [ "mac=00:16:3e:5b:44:5f,bridge=pubbr", "mac=00:16:3e:5b:44:60,bridge=virtbr" ]
Interfaces are associated with both bridges properly, but only an eth0 device appears in the domU.
If the low-order bits are magic in a MAC, then maybe my second one is an invalid, but I don't find any documentation of such; the low two bits of the *first* byte have meanings, but I haven't touched them.
I set the second one manually; copied the first one and added one.
vif = [ "mac=00:16:3e:5b:44:5f,bridge=pubbr", "mac=00:16:3e:5b:44:60,bridge=virtbr" ]
Looks good to me?
Interfaces are associated with both bridges properly, but only an eth0 device appears in the domU.
If the low-order bits are magic in a MAC, then maybe my second one is an invalid, but I don't find any documentation of such; the low two bits of the *first* byte have meanings, but I haven't touched them.
Well, the digits are between 0-9, A-F so I can't see it being invalid.
I guess you use Network Mangler? Since my very first experience with it, I have never installed it or used since!
jlc
On Mon, August 25, 2008 15:24, Joseph L. Casale wrote:
I set the second one manually; copied the first one and added one.
vif = [ "mac=00:16:3e:5b:44:5f,bridge=pubbr", "mac=00:16:3e:5b:44:60,bridge=virtbr" ]
Looks good to me?
Thanks for the second set of eyes. It's amazing what I can look past sometimes.
Interfaces are associated with both bridges properly, but only an eth0 device appears in the domU.
If the low-order bits are magic in a MAC, then maybe my second one is an invalid, but I don't find any documentation of such; the low two bits of the *first* byte have meanings, but I haven't touched them.
Well, the digits are between 0-9, A-F so I can't see it being invalid.
I guess you use Network Mangler? Since my very first experience with it, I have never installed it or used since!
As in /usr/sbin/system-config-network? The yes. Or something else (probably officially called "network manager")? At this point there are so many layers of mess in a brand-new Centos install that I'm afraid to touch the real config files by hand; you never know what's vestigial, what will get overwritten, and so forth.
As in /usr/sbin/system-config-network? The yes. Or something else (probably officially called "network manager")? At this point there are
Well, I am probably about to be char broiled in flame, but I just edit /etc/sysconfig/network-scripts/ifcfg-eth{n} and what ever else like resolv.conf by hand and uninstall network-mangler or remove it from my KS script.
Network mangler is the devil :)
jlc
On Mon, August 25, 2008 16:55, Joseph L. Casale wrote:
As in /usr/sbin/system-config-network? The yes. Or something else (probably officially called "network manager")? At this point there are
Well, I am probably about to be char broiled in flame, but I just edit /etc/sysconfig/network-scripts/ifcfg-eth{n} and what ever else like resolv.conf by hand and uninstall network-mangler or remove it from my KS script.
Network mangler is the devil :)
Yikes, I hadn't realized it was quite that bad.
But you're quite right. I manually added the ifcfg-eth1 file with suitable content, rebooted, and the interface is now present. Can't actually tell yet whether it's "working"; that would be easy to test though.
Next step is to install LVS on that system; it needed that second interface to get to the pair of server systems that are going to be hidden behind the LVS system in this test setup. But I think that's something I'll start tomorrow, not now.
-
David Dyer-Bennet -
Joseph L. Casale