On 03/18/2010 11:53 AM, Joe Conway wrote:
> On 03/17/2010 05:49 PM, Joe Conway wrote:
>> On 03/17/2010 05:44 PM, Tom Horsley wrote:
>>> On Wed, 17 Mar 2010 17:28:42 -0700
>>> Joe Conway wrote:
>>>
A bit more sleuthing and I found that the culprit is dhclient. I am
using a dynamically assi
On 03/17/2010 05:49 PM, Joe Conway wrote:
> On 03/17/2010 05:44 PM, Tom Horsley wrote:
>> On Wed, 17 Mar 2010 17:28:42 -0700
>> Joe Conway wrote:
>>
>>> A bit more sleuthing and I found that the culprit is dhclient. I am
>>> using a dynamically assigned address (pinned to a static IP at my dhcp
>>>
On 03/17/2010 06:02 PM, Tom Horsley wrote:
> On Wed, 17 Mar 2010 17:49:18 -0700
> Joe Conway wrote:
>
>> Interestingly I cannot even find dhclient among the listed components here:
>>
>> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/enter_bug.cgi?format=guided&product=Fedora
>
> Little known trivia: The components
On Wed, 17 Mar 2010 17:49:18 -0700
Joe Conway wrote:
> Interestingly I cannot even find dhclient among the listed components here:
>
> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/enter_bug.cgi?format=guided&product=Fedora
Little known trivia: The components are based on the source rpm
names, so the component se
On 03/17/2010 05:44 PM, Tom Horsley wrote:
> On Wed, 17 Mar 2010 17:28:42 -0700
> Joe Conway wrote:
>
>> A bit more sleuthing and I found that the culprit is dhclient. I am
>> using a dynamically assigned address (pinned to a static IP at my dhcp
>> server), and I bet you are not. A downgrade make
On Wed, 17 Mar 2010 17:28:42 -0700
Joe Conway wrote:
> A bit more sleuthing and I found that the culprit is dhclient. I am
> using a dynamically assigned address (pinned to a static IP at my dhcp
> server), and I bet you are not. A downgrade makes the problem go away:
My host machine is using a s
On 03/12/2010 01:59 PM, Tom Horsley wrote:
> On Fri, 12 Mar 2010 13:53:18 -0800
> Joe Conway wrote:
>
>> But it now shows up on both my host machine and independently on a
>> fedora 12 virtual machine. Both are x86_64. Are you running x86_64?
>
> Yep. 64 bit fedora 12. Just started another ubuntu
On Fri, 12 Mar 2010 13:53:18 -0800
Joe Conway wrote:
> But it now shows up on both my host machine and independently on a
> fedora 12 virtual machine. Both are x86_64. Are you running x86_64?
Yep. 64 bit fedora 12. Just started another ubuntu virtual machine,
br0 is still at 1500.
--
users maili
On 03/12/2010 01:35 PM, Tom Horsley wrote:
> On Fri, 12 Mar 2010 13:27:31 -0800
> Joe Conway wrote:
>
>> Anyone have any idea what package would determine the default MTU for a
>> bridged network device?
>
> I can't help with that, but my fully updated f12 system shows
> 1500 MTU for my br0 with
On Fri, 12 Mar 2010 13:27:31 -0800
Joe Conway wrote:
> Anyone have any idea what package would determine the default MTU for a
> bridged network device?
I can't help with that, but my fully updated f12 system shows
1500 MTU for my br0 with a windows XP VM running, so whatever
is going on doesn't
On 03/11/2010 04:20 PM, Joe Conway wrote:
> Interestingly after a reboot:
>
>
> # brctl show
> bridge name bridge id STP enabled interfaces
> br0 8000.18a9051f09f0 no eth0
>
> # ifconfig
> br0 UP BROADCAST RUNNING MUL
On 03/11/2010 04:37 PM, Tom Horsley wrote:
> On Thu, 11 Mar 2010 16:20:04 -0800
> Joe Conway wrote:
>
>> So I can at least work around the issue this way after starting the VM,
>> but still don't understand the root cause.
>
> The vnet0 may be coming from the "default" network that libvirt
> prov
On Thu, 11 Mar 2010 16:20:04 -0800
Joe Conway wrote:
> So I can at least work around the issue this way after starting the VM,
> but still don't understand the root cause.
The vnet0 may be coming from the "default" network that libvirt
provides. If you are using bridging for everything, you can
e
On 03/11/2010 02:52 PM, Joe Conway wrote:
> On 03/11/2010 02:31 PM, Rick Stevens wrote:
>> Check all interfaces under "ifconfig -a" and see if any of the participants
>> in the
>> bridge have a small MTU. IIRC, the smallest MTU will be propagated
>> to the bridge so it doesn't overrun the least-
On 03/11/2010 02:31 PM, Rick Stevens wrote:
> On 03/11/2010 02:14 PM, Joe Conway wrote:
>> In the last few days I've noticed network connectivity issues from
>> multiple virtual machines (fedora, centos, winxp) running on a fedora 12
>> host. What seemed odd was that I could ping by host name, show
On 03/11/2010 02:14 PM, Joe Conway wrote:
> In the last few days I've noticed network connectivity issues from
> multiple virtual machines (fedora, centos, winxp) running on a fedora 12
> host. What seemed odd was that I could ping by host name, showing that
> both the basic network functionality a
16 matches
Mail list logo
