| |
|
 |
|
 |
|
|
|
| |
|
|
xen-users
RE: [Xen-users] odd behavior with network-bridge and ip aliases ondomU:s
> I'm experiencing odd behavior of Linux domU:s that are running on
> bridged ethernet and using ip aliases. I've been able to rule out
> everything, including multiple bridges on domU:s to just adding ip
> aliases.
>
> When I do "ifconfig eth0:1 xx.xxx.xxx.xxx" on the domU, it stops
> respondig over ethernet, on the original address also which is
specified
> in the .cfg. Is there a way to specify both/all addresses in the .cfg?
> Or is there a "best practice" that I should follow? :)
I don't think interface aliases are really supported anymore.
You can add a new ip address to an interface by just doing:
ip addr add xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx/yyy dev iface
eg
ip addr add 11.22.33.44/24 dev eth0
and often you don't actually need the secondary addresses on the
interface so you can just add them to lo instead.
Under Debian you can add the command to /etc/network/interfaces, eg:
"
auto xen-br0
iface xen-br0 inet static
bridge_ports eth0
bridge_maxwait 0
# primary address
address 11.22.33.40
netmask 255.255.255.0
gateway 192.168.200.254
# secondary address
up /sbin/ip addr add 11.22.33.44/24 dev $IFACE || true
"
if you add them to lo instead, then you'll need a 'down' too, eg
"
auto lo
iface lo inet loopback
up /sbin/ip addr add 11.22.33.44/24 dev $IFACE || true
down /sbin/ip addr del 11.22.33.44/24 dev $IFACE || true
"
I normally put the '|| true' at the end so that a failure to add or
remove an address doesn't prevent the interface coming up or going down.
The reason I add addresses to lo instead of the interface is that the
routing daemons I use announce using all IP addresses on an interface
which looks messy.
James
_______________________________________________
Xen-users mailing list
Xen-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-users
|
|
|
| |
|
Home