lwip-users
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [lwip-users] Virtual machines in the same host (bridge).


From: Norberto R. de Goes Jr.
Subject: Re: [lwip-users] Virtual machines in the same host (bridge).
Date: Fri, 30 Jan 2015 13:51:56 -0200

Sylvain:
progress! Almost there...

I changed the tap mac addr to 02:03:04:05:06:07. The arp is ok (VM#2 to VM#1), on VM#2:

address@hidden ~]$ arp -n
Address                  HWtype  HWaddress           Flags Mask            Iface
169.254.6.2              ether   02:03:04:05:06:07   C                     p2p1


However, no reply ping is received in the origin (VM#2) :
address@hidden ~]$ ping 169.254.6.2
PING 169.254.6.2 (169.254.6.2) 56(84) bytes of data.
^C
--- 169.254.6.2 ping statistics ---
7836 packets transmitted, 0 received, 100% packet loss, time 7836579ms


TRACES:

>>> tcpdump p2p1 on VM#2 (origin):
address@hidden norberto]# tcpdump -i p2p1 -v
tcpdump: listening on p2p1, link-type EN10MB (Ethernet), capture size 65535 bytes
13:36:07.714973 IP (tos 0x0, ttl 64, id 0, offset 0, flags [DF], proto ICMP (1), length 84)
    vmGoes-fedora2 > 169.254.6.2: ICMP echo request, id 1840, seq 329, length 64
13:36:08.334449 IP (tos 0x0, ttl 64, id 0, offset 0, flags [DF], proto ICMP (1), length 84)
    vmGoes-fedora2 > 169.254.6.2: ICMP echo request, id 1843, seq 279, length 64
13:36:08.716791 IP (tos 0x0, ttl 64, id 0, offset 0, flags [DF], proto ICMP (1), length 84)
    vmGoes-fedora2 > 169.254.6.2: ICMP echo request, id 1840, seq 330, length 64
13:36:09.334016 IP (tos 0x0, ttl 64, id 0, offset 0, flags [DF], proto ICMP (1), length 84)
    vmGoes-fedora2 > 169.254.6.2: ICMP echo request, id 1843, seq 280, length 64
...

The ICMP request packets flow by p2p1 interface at VM#2.
But no ICMP packtes captured the br0  (VM#1):

>>> tcpdump br0 on VM#1 (destination):
address@hidden norberto]# tcpdump -i br0 -v
tcpdump: listening on br0, link-type EN10MB (Ethernet), capture size 65535 bytes


Please, do you have any suggestion?
Thanks.
Norberto


2015-01-30 10:37 GMT-02:00 Sylvain Rochet <address@hidden>:
HI,

On Fri, Jan 30, 2015 at 09:35:21AM -0200, Norberto R. de Goes Jr. wrote:
>
> >>>>> tcpdump tap0:
> address@hidden norberto]# tcpdump -i tap0 -v
> tcpdump: WARNING: tap0: no IPv4 address assigned
> tcpdump: listening on tap0, link-type EN10MB (Ethernet), capture size 65535
> bytes
> 09:30:18.473570 ARP, Ethernet (len 6), IPv4 (len 4), Request who-has
> 169.254.6.2 tell 169.254.4.39, length 46
> 09:30:18.474639 ARP, Ethernet (len 6), IPv4 (len 4), Reply 169.254.6.2
> is-at 01:02:03:04:05:06 (oui Unknown), length 46

01:02:03:04:05:06 is not a valid MAC address.

01:xx:xx:xx:xx:xx = MULTICAST !!!

You should use a 02:xx:xx:xx:xx:xx

Sylvain

_______________________________________________
lwip-users mailing list
address@hidden
https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lwip-users



--
Norberto R. de Goes Jr.
CPqD - DRC
Tel.: +55 19 3705-4241 / Fax: +55 19 3705-6125
address@hidden
www.cpqd.com.br



reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]