AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |
Back to Blog
Upgrade ubuntu virtualhostx1/3/2023 ![]() ![]() I think that should work based on ARP, but the ARP table on the switch seems to be correct (the mac's are pointing to the right lacp-connections/LAG's). My guess is that there must be going something wrong on the switch, because the switch should have already seen the traffic has an destination on VH2 and not VH3. The relevant network is all in the same subnet/vlan. ![]() ![]() I've connected all proxmox nodes using LACP (active+active) to 2 cisco-switches, that are connected in stack using 2 fiber connections. Is should be traffic between VH1 and VH2. I guess the bigger problem is: the network traffic should have never entered VH3. tap3i0-interface seems to be in promisc-mode (= normal/default?), the fwpr3i0, fwln3i0, fwbr3i0 devices are not in promisc (= normal/default?). the arp-cache on all proxmox nodes doesn't seem to include any vm's (= normal/default?). I guess this could be normal behavior because the virtual host can't find the mac-address locally because it's not on the node (it resides on another node). After this package arrives at VH2 (even though it shouldn't be here): is it normal that these packages are being delivered to VM3 and VM4 even though the MAC-addresses/IP's don't correspond with those vm's? ![]()
0 Comments
Read More
Leave a Reply. |