As previously pointed out, Can you please send VR start command, /var/cache/cloud/cmdline file in VR also /var/log/cloud.log. These logs helps us to understand where the problem is.
Thanks, Jayapal On 27-Feb-2015, at 2:54 AM, John Skinner <[email protected]> wrote: > This happens with all routers in that specific zone, the other zone is ok. > Messages and cloudstack logs on the router do not offer any insight. You > can see the results of ipassoc.sh in messages and that it is clearly > setting up postrouting rules for eth3 which should not exist. CloudStack > agent log on the host is useless per always, and the qemu log for the > routers just display the start command. Virsh dumpxml of the router does > show 4 interfaces for the router. I am trying to discover at what point the > VM thinks it needs to create that 4th interface. User VMs are being created > just fine, as well as the console proxy and secondary storage VMs for that > zone. > > On Thu, Feb 26, 2015 at 2:29 PM, Somesh Naidu <[email protected]> > wrote: > >> Strange, I haven't seen that happen before. >> >> Is this happening with all routers in the environment or only a specific >> one? >> >> If latter we might just try recreating it. If former, then probably have >> to look at /var/log/messages on the router. >> >> Somesh >> CloudPlatform Escalations >> Citrix Systems, Inc. >> >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: John Skinner [mailto:[email protected]] >> Sent: Thursday, February 26, 2015 3:19 PM >> To: [email protected] >> Subject: Re: CS 4.3.2 virtual router issue >> >> Yeah. As far as CloudStack is concerned, it has 3 NICs - the UI and the >> database confirms. The API call also only calls for 3 NICs. How this 4th >> NIC is getting created is a mystery. It has the same IP as the 3rd NIC, it >> doesn't make any sense. >> >> On Thu, Feb 26, 2015 at 2:16 PM, Somesh Naidu <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> >>> Did you check the entries in the nics table for that router? That might >>> give you some pointers. >>> >>> Somesh >>> CloudPlatform Escalations >>> Citrix Systems, Inc. >>> >>> -----Original Message----- >>> From: John Skinner [mailto:[email protected]] >>> Sent: Thursday, February 26, 2015 10:59 AM >>> To: [email protected] >>> Subject: CS 4.3.2 virtual router issue >>> >>> Running CloudStack 4.3.2 with advanced networking using Open vSwitch on >>> KVM. I am having an issue where my virtual router is coming up with 2 >>> public interfaces when there should only be 1. CloudStack is only >>> requesting the 3 interfaces (private, control, and public) but the VM is >>> coming up with 4. The second public interface comes up with the same IP >> as >>> the first public interface. This obviously really breaks routing and ip >>> forwarding as the postrouting rules in iptables get created for the >> second >>> interface when the traffic is coming in on the 1st interface. >>> >>> Has any one seen anything like this? I can't figure out why it is getting >>> created with 2 public interfaces. >>> >> >> >> >> -- >> >> *John Skinner* >> >> Senior Cloud Engineer - Ops Lead | Appcore >> >> >> Office +1.800.735.7104 | Direct +1.515.612.7783 >> >> [email protected] | www.appcore.com >> >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >> >> The information in this message is intended for the named recipients only. >> It may contain information that is privileged, confidential or otherwise >> protected from disclosure. If you are not the intended recipient, you are >> hereby notified that any disclosure, copying, distribution, or the taking >> of any action in reliance on the contents of this message is strictly >> prohibited. If you have received this e-mail in error, do not print it or >> disseminate it or its contents. In such event, please notify the sender by >> return e-mail and delete the e-mail file immediately thereafter. Thank you. >> > > > > -- > > *John Skinner* > > Senior Cloud Engineer - Ops Lead | Appcore > > > Office +1.800.735.7104 | Direct +1.515.612.7783 > > [email protected] | www.appcore.com > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > The information in this message is intended for the named recipients only. > It may contain information that is privileged, confidential or otherwise > protected from disclosure. If you are not the intended recipient, you are > hereby notified that any disclosure, copying, distribution, or the taking > of any action in reliance on the contents of this message is strictly > prohibited. If you have received this e-mail in error, do not print it or > disseminate it or its contents. In such event, please notify the sender by > return e-mail and delete the e-mail file immediately thereafter. Thank you.
