From owner-freebsd-virtualization@FreeBSD.ORG Thu Sep 2 14:15:45 2010 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-virtualization@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DA3C41065698 for ; Thu, 2 Sep 2010 14:15:45 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from frank@zzattack.org) Received: from mail-bw0-f54.google.com (mail-bw0-f54.google.com [209.85.214.54]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6F04E8FC1B for ; Thu, 2 Sep 2010 14:15:44 +0000 (UTC) Received: by bwz20 with SMTP id 20so724530bwz.13 for ; Thu, 02 Sep 2010 07:15:44 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.204.126.82 with SMTP id b18mr6465634bks.124.1283436943992; Thu, 02 Sep 2010 07:15:43 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [10.31.45.197] (21-78-ftth.onsneteindhoven.nl [88.159.78.21]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id s34sm463787bkk.1.2010.09.02.07.15.41 (version=SSLv3 cipher=RC4-MD5); Thu, 02 Sep 2010 07:15:42 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <4C7FB15D.8040906@zzattack.org> Date: Thu, 02 Sep 2010 16:14:53 +0200 From: Frank Razenberg User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 6.1; en-US; rv:1.9.2.8) Gecko/20100802 Thunderbird/3.1.2 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: freebsd-virtualization@freebsd.org References: <4C7E8E7C.7090708@zzattack.org> <4C7F8551.6020901@zzattack.org> <4C7FA623.2010802@zzattack.org> <20100902134953.C31898@maildrop.int.zabbadoz.net> In-Reply-To: <20100902134953.C31898@maildrop.int.zabbadoz.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: duplicate epair ipv6 addresses X-BeenThere: freebsd-virtualization@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "Discussion of various virtualization techniques FreeBSD supports." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 02 Sep 2010 14:15:46 -0000 Hi Bjoern, I do have an openvpn setup which also creates a bridge. At one point in time it conflicted with the bridge0 interface used for the jails. The openvpn 'up' script did the following: #!/bin/sh /sbin/ifconfig bridge0 create /sbin/ifconfig bridge0 addm nfe0 addm $dev up /sbin/ifconfig $dev up It may have executed a couple of times while bridge0 already existed and had the epairs as members. I don't recall the epair's 'a'-end having different ethernet addresses before, but I haven't specifically looked at them. I don't believe I do any manual collision detection. I'm not sure whether this answers your questions, if you need any more info please let me know. Frank On 9/2/2010 3:51 PM, Bjoern A. Zeeb wrote: > On Thu, 2 Sep 2010, Frank Razenberg wrote: > > Hey, > >> base >> nfe0: flags=8943 >> metric 0 mtu 1500 >> options=80008 >> ether 00:22:15:bb:6d:6f >> inet 10.31.45.10 netmask 0xffffff00 broadcast 10.31.45.255 >> media: Ethernet autoselect (1000baseT ) >> status: active >> lo0: flags=8049 metric 0 mtu 16384 >> options=3 >> inet6 fe80::1%lo0 prefixlen 64 scopeid 0x2 >> inet6 ::1 prefixlen 128 >> inet 127.0.0.1 netmask 0xff000000 >> nd6 options=3 >> bridge0: flags=8843 metric 0 >> mtu 1500 >> ether de:3b:7a:d8:3a:98 >> id 00:00:00:00:00:00 priority 32768 hellotime 2 fwddelay 15 >> maxage 20 holdcnt 6 proto rstp maxaddr 100 timeout 1200 >> root id 00:00:00:00:00:00 priority 32768 ifcost 0 port 0 >> member: epair2a flags=143 >> ifmaxaddr 0 port 6 priority 128 path cost 2000 >> member: epair1a flags=143 >> ifmaxaddr 0 port 5 priority 128 path cost 2000 >> member: epair0a flags=143 >> ifmaxaddr 0 port 4 priority 128 path cost 2000 >> member: nfe0 flags=143 >> ifmaxaddr 0 port 1 priority 128 path cost 55 >> epair0a: flags=8943 >> metric 0 mtu 1500 >> ether 02:9a:c6:00:04:0a >> epair1a: flags=8943 >> metric 0 mtu 1500 >> ether 02:da:d1:00:05:0a >> epair2a: flags=8943 >> metric 0 mtu 1500 >> ether 02:ea:c6:00:06:0a > > What makes me wonder is why the ether addresses of all three "a" > epair ends are non-default? Do you know what changed them? Did you > do do avoid collisions with possibly other epairs bridged to a 2nd > machine over nfe0? > > /bz >