Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Wed, 28 Oct 2020 15:27:52 +0100
From:      Michael Gmelin <freebsd@grem.de>
To:        D'Arcy Cain <darcy@druid.net>
Cc:        FreeBSD Net <freebsd-net@freebsd.org>
Subject:   Re: Bridge woes
Message-ID:  <FCCDA085-300D-4465-BFD2-45F11C59D3EF@grem.de>
In-Reply-To: <6ca8956a-76d0-8d83-e1ce-015de1fcf2bd@druid.net>
References:  <6ca8956a-76d0-8d83-e1ce-015de1fcf2bd@druid.net>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help


> On 28. Oct 2020, at 12:32, D'Arcy Cain <darcy@druid.net> wrote:
>=20
> =EF=BB=BFOn 10/27/20 2:58 PM, Michael Gmelin wrote:
>=20
> I hope you don't mind but I reverted this conversation back to the list in=
 case it gives someone else any ideas.
>=20
>> Hi,
>> I tried to reproduce the problem on my home network, but things just
>> work as expected.
>> I could run VMs with IPs off the local network, fixed ones as well as
>> DHCP.
>> The topology looks a bit different:
>> vm->server->router ->(nat)-> internet
>>      |
>>      + dhcp/dns
>=20
> I suppose that that is essentially the same but let me see if I get it.  Y=
ou have a network, say 192.168.1.0/24, behind your NAT router.  You have phy=
sical servers like 192.168.1.1 and 192.168.1.2 on this network.  You then pu=
t a VM on the  .1 host numbered 192.168.1.3 and it can connect to 192.168.1.=
2.  Is that correct?
>=20
>> I would speculate that there's either something going on with
>> the switch (you might want to take a look at it), or you're experiencing
>> some sort of asymmetric routing issue (ping/icmp is usually just fine
>=20
> Not sure what that could be.  It's not just a problem with external hosts.=
 Hosts on the same network are also showing the symptoms.  Another point is t=
hat I can access it inbound.  It's only outbound connections that don't work=
.
>=20
>> with that). Or it might be something with the bge driver (I'm using em
>=20
> The only server that it can connect to is running bce.  I have some em ser=
vers but it doesn't connect to those.
>=20
>> here). I assume you already tried disabling all sorts of offloading to
>> see if it makes a difference?
>=20
> Yep.  I tried -tso -lro -rxcsum -rxcsum6 -txcsum -txcsum6 -vlanhwtag -vlan=
hwtso and subsets of that.
>=20
>> Other than that I would suggest to play with tcpdump to see if packets
>> are returned on the same interface they've been sent out on or not.
>=20
> Here is an example packet seen on the host:
>=20
> 11:20:40.397067 IP 98.158.139.71.44448 > 98.158.139.66.22: Flags [S], seq 3=
285763868, win 65535, options [mss 1460,nop,wscale 6,sackOK,TS val 300376226=
2 ecr 0], length 0
>=20
> The .66 never sees the packet and the host never sees a return packet.  On=
 the other hand, a connection attempt from .66 to the VM shows up properly.
>=20
>=20
>> Proxy arp might play a role on a local network, that's something I've
>> seen in the past when I has hosts with multiple interfaces on the same
>> (multiple) networks. If you can afford to try it, I would see if
>> shutting down eth1 (and then flushing all arp tables on all
>> hosts/devices involved in your test) makes a difference[0].
>=20
> I want to be careful about dropping eth1 as it is the only way in if I mes=
s up eth0.
>=20

Can you (afford to) reboot the machine reliably? If so, schedule a reboot us=
ing "shutdown -r +10" and then bring down the the interface to see if it mak=
es a difference.

-m
> --=20
> D'Arcy J.M. Cain <darcy@druid.net>         |  Democracy is three wolves
> http://www.druid.net/darcy/                |  and a sheep voting on
> +1 416 788 2246     (DoD#0082)    (eNTP)   |  what's for dinner.
> IM: darcy@VybeNetworks.com, VoIP: sip:darcy@druid.net
>=20
> Disclaimer: By sending an email to ANY of my addresses you
> are agreeing that:
>=20
> 1.  I am by definition, "the intended recipient".
> 2.  All information in the email is mine to do with as I see
>    fit and make such financial profit, political mileage, or
>    good joke as it lends itself to. In particular, I may quote
>    it where I please.
> 3.  I may take the contents as representing the views of
>    your company if I so wish.
> 4.  This overrides any disclaimer or statement of
>    confidentiality that may be included or implied in
>    your message.




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?FCCDA085-300D-4465-BFD2-45F11C59D3EF>