From: Herbert Poetzl (herbert_at_13thfloor.at)
Date: Thu 03 Jul 2003 - 14:54:08 BST
On Thu, Jul 03, 2003 at 03:16:38PM +1000, Fernando Serto wrote:
> > > skywalker is a slackware 9 and fenestra is a redhat 8. both of them with
> the
> > > ctx17 patch applied. and the vserver packages, I compiled and installed
> the
> > > same source tarball... I tried the rpms, but as I was having problems, I
> > > decided to remove them and use the same files... sorry for my stupidity!
> >
> > what about the network configuration?
> > is this also equivalent or at least compareable?
>
> yes, both have an external interface (eth0) and an internal one (eth1). and
> even with the wrong broadcast address, my setup on slackware is running, and
> on redhat (with all your instructions to Matthew, ie correct broadcast) it's
> not.
>
> > > how would I set this up? isn't it automatic? in my box at home, the
> > > broadcast is from eth0 (external), but it's still working...
> >
> > look, the linux ip stack is very powerful, the
> > _usual_ interface utilities are from 2.0.x ...
> > you'll have to use iproute2 to unleash all the
> > features ...
> >
> > In addition to that complexity, the ctx-17 network
> > code seems to do some things wrong (or at least in
> > a very strange way ...)
>
> but why only in redhat? I have the same kernel, patch and vserver source
> tarball on both...
>
> > if you attach a packet logger (eg tcpdump), you'll see that
> > for example a ping to an aliased interface, will result in
> > packages with 'wrong' source addresses leaving the 'right'
> > interface ...
> >
> > as far as I know (didn't investigate yet) this is _not_ an issue
> > of the kernel. ping simply uses the first address of an interface
> > if no -I <address> is specified ...
> >
> > so if the alias interface is configured correctly, you'll
> > still need to specify -I 192.168.10.111 for ping to do the
> > 'right' thing ...
> >
> > from within a vserver this is not required, because the
> > virtual server only 'sees' the aliased interface, so ping
> > does what you expect ...
>
> if I use the "ping -I 192.168.10.111 192.168.10.142" from the vserver, I can
> ping my desktop, but, without the -I (still from the vserver) I can't.
ahh, now you are talking facts ...
please provide the first five lines of ping 192.168.10.142
on both machines (within the vserver) as well as the
output of ping -V
best,
Herbert
> > hth,
> > Herbert
> >