[pve-devel] new bridge code doesn't work with redhat kernel

[Alexandre DERUMIER]

>>might you please also try to set your ethX devices in the bond to 
>>promisious mode? 
>>
>>ip link set promisc on dev eth0 
>>ip link set promisc on dev eth1 

I had tried with promisc, doesn't help.

I can't get it work anymore with vlan on bridge ...
(I have tried with pve-kernel-17 && 18)


I don't have too much time to test it, 
So I rollback to old code for now, works 100% for me.



----- Mail original ----- 

De: "Stefan Priebe - Profihost AG" <s.priebe at profihost.ag> 
À: "Alexandre DERUMIER" <aderumier at odiso.com> 
Cc: "Dietmar Maurer" <dietmar at proxmox.com>, pve-devel at pve.proxmox.com 
Envoyé: Mardi 12 Février 2013 09:19:24 
Objet: Re: [pve-devel] new bridge code doesn't work with redhat kernel 

Hi, 

might you please also try to set your ethX devices in the bond to 
promisious mode? 

ip link set promisc on dev eth0 
ip link set promisc on dev eth1 

To me then everything works fine - like it is filtering to much when in 
bond mode... 

Stefan 

Am 11.02.2013 15:06, schrieb Alexandre DERUMIER: 
>>> Please can we vote on that? Also include a short explanation why you prefer something. 
> 
> Well,I really don't know what I prefer. 
> 
> I think I'll vote for old way, because It's working fine and well tested. 
> 
> 
> 
> ----- Mail original ----- 
> 
> De: "Dietmar Maurer" <dietmar at proxmox.com> 
> À: "Alexandre DERUMIER" <aderumier at odiso.com>, "Stefan Priebe" <s.priebe at profihost.ag> 
> Cc: pve-devel at pve.proxmox.com 
> Envoyé: Lundi 11 Février 2013 09:42:16 
> Objet: RE: [pve-devel] new bridge code doesn't work with redhat kernel 
> 
> 
> 
>> -----Original Message----- 
>> From: Alexandre DERUMIER [mailto:aderumier at odiso.com] 
>> Sent: Freitag, 08. Februar 2013 08:12 
>> To: Stefan Priebe; Dietmar Maurer 
>> Cc: pve-devel at pve.proxmox.com 
>> Subject: Re: [pve-devel] new bridge code doesn't work with redhat kernel 
>> 
>> Hi Stefan, Thanks it's working ! (I have not aware of vlan-raw-device syntax). 
>> 
>> Based of this, I have a better setup, putting ip addresse on vlan interface, 
>> and not on a bridge. 
>> So it's a small change. 
>> 
>> But I really think this change should not go in stable pve repo before a big 
>> release like proxmox 2.3. 
>> As It ll require reboot of the host to have clean bridges without mix of tagged 
>> interfaces and tagged bridges interfaces. 
> 
> 2.3 release is the next release planned end of February. There is a new kernel, and 
> a new kvm (1.4, including new backup code), so we need to recommend a reboot anyways. 
> 
> Here is a list of advantages and disadvantages: 
> 
> new code: 
> 
> + works with any number of physical interfaces 
> + works with gvrp 
> - only tested by a few people 
> - not fully compatible with existing vlan setup 
> 
> old code: 
> 
> + works well for many users 
> + also used by RHEV/libvirt 
> - needs exactly one physical interface (should also work with 0 physical interfaces) 
> - gvrp does not work (https://lkml.org/lkml/2013/2/7/107) 
> + can use vlan hardware support (better performance?) 
> 
> 
> Seems GVRP is a rarely used feature, because it is very dangerous security wise. 
> 
> So what is your opinion: 
> 
> A.) keep old VLAN code (revert change) 
> B.) use new VLAN code 
> 
> Please can we vote on that? Also include a short explanation why you prefer something. 
> 
> - Dietmar 
>