Menu
▾
▴
Re: [uml-user] multicast, UML & RH9
|
From: Hayim S. <ha...@po...> - 2004-05-23 14:54:26
|
Well, I tried what you said.
Using tuntap gave better results.
the UMLs finaly understood they have eth0.
I attached eth0 to tap0, tap1.
I also created a bridge as you stated. added tap0, tap1.
I also activated eth0 of the host and added it to the bridge.
The problem now is that none can talk with none.
When Itry to ping one uml from another ping gives "host unreachable".
I also tried to start one uml and ping the host.
This (according to the tutorials I read) should be easier and not require
any route changes. It also fails.
some info from the host and uml is given below.
Any idea?
Help would be appreciated (again)
Hayim.
At the host:
[root@localhost root]# ifconfig
eth0 Link encap:Ethernet
HWaddr 00:0E:A6:AF:9C:3F
inet addr:192.168.0.10 Bcast:192.168.0.255 Mask:255.255.255.0
UP BROADCAST MULTICAST MTU:1500 Metric:1
RX packets:0 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 frame:0
TX packets:0 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 carrier:0
collisions:0 txqueuelen:100
RX bytes:0 (0.0 b) TX bytes:0 (0.0 b)
Interrupt:3 Base address:0x8800
lo Link encap:Local Loopback
inet addr:127.0.0.1 Mask:255.0.0.0
UP LOOPBACK RUNNING MTU:16436 Metric:1
RX packets:46690 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 frame:0
TX packets:46690 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 carrier:0
collisions:0 txqueuelen:0
RX bytes:3101952 (2.9 Mb) TX bytes:3101952 (2.9 Mb)
tap1 Link encap:Ethernet HWaddr FE:FD:00:00:00:00
inet addr:192.168.0.101 Bcast:192.168.0.255 Mask:255.255.255.255
UP BROADCAST RUNNING MULTICAST MTU:1500 Metric:1
RX packets:295 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 frame:0
TX packets:21 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 carrier:0
collisions:0 txqueuelen:0
RX bytes:31039 (30.3 Kb) TX bytes:924 (924.0 b)
Interrupt:5
[root@localhost root]# brctl show br0 bridge name bridge id STP enabled
interfaces br0 8000.000ea6af9c3f yes tap0
tap1
eth0
[root@localhost root]# route
Kernel IP routing table Destination Gateway
Genmask Flags Metric Ref Use Iface 192.168.0.1 * 255.255.255.255 UH 0 0 0
tap1 192.168.0.0 * 255.255.255.0 U 0 0 0 eth0 169.254.0.0 * 255.255.0.0 U
0 0 0 lo 127.0.0.0 * 255.0.0.0 U 0 0 0 lo At the UML: bash-2.05# ifconfig
eth0 Link encap:Ethernet HWaddr FE:FD:00:00:01:02
inet addr:192.168.0.1 Bcast:192.168.0.255 Mask:255.255.255.0
UP BROADCAST RUNNING MULTICAST MTU:1484 Metric:1
RX packets:18 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 frame:0
TX packets:133 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 carrier:0
collisions:0 txqueuelen:100
RX bytes:504 (504.0 b) TX bytes:13412 (13.0 Kb)
Interrupt:5
lo Link encap:Local Loopback
inet addr:127.0.0.1 Mask:255.0.0.0
UP LOOPBACK RUNNING MTU:16436 Metric:1
RX packets:32 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 frame:0
TX packets:32 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 carrier:0
collisions:0 txqueuelen:0
RX bytes:3584 (3.5 Kb) TX bytes:3584 (3.5 Kb) bash-2.05# route
Kernel IP routing table Destination Gateway Genmask Flags Metric Ref Use
Iface 192.168.0.0 * 255.255.255.0 U 0 0 0 eth0 127.0.0.0 * 255.0.0.0 U 0 0
0 lo
> In my understanding of putting together bridged networking, you don't
> really "have to" even have the network card in the whole mix. you make
> a bridge (br0 is what I use), attach all of the tuntap devices to that
> bridge, and not even include the eth0 device. (it doesn't need to be
> included since you don't want to see the network anyway)
>
> Like:
>
> brctl addbr br0 brctl addif br0 tun0
>
> To create the bridge, and attach a tuntap device of tun0 to the bridge.
> Also, you don't need IP addressing for the bridge and tuntap device on
> the host machine if you use bridging.
>
> I'd use bridging to make life easier, but that's just me... just out of
> curiousity, why use 192.192.192.192 and not 192.168.x.x, 10.x.x.x or
> 172.16.1.x net? RFC covers those as private networks.
>
|