[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]
List: openvswitch-discuss
Subject: [ovs-discuss] =?utf-8?b?5Zue5aSN77yaICBHUkUgcHJvYmxlbQ==?=
From: jesse () nicira ! com (Jesse Gross)
Date: 2013-01-23 17:23:21
Message-ID: CAEP_g=-03BXO2piqm7F6yKvzVgJpZuvSR5W8T0ZsChT6XEikGw () mail ! gmail ! com
[Download RAW message or body]
Please don't drop the mailing list.
Packets egress from GRE ports through the IP stack, which is how they
get from br0 to br1 in the latter case. In the former case, packets
leaving the GRE port are sent through the default route, which is br0.
Since this is bridged to the GRE port it creates a loop.
On Tue, Jan 22, 2013 at 10:33 PM, ?? ? <wchunx416 at yahoo.cn> wrote:
> The two hosts connect to the same physical switch.Before I use OVS,they can
> be normal networking.
>
> In the latter case,each OVS has two bridges?br0 and br1.I add gre0 and tap1
> to the new bridge named br1?and the host nic eth0 is still on br0. the
> configuration of gre is the same as the former case.
>
> I think there is a loop,but I don't know why.The screenshots of wireshark
> are in the annex.
>
> In the latter case, eth0 is connected to br0, and eth0 is the outside
> interface, eth0 is not connected to br1. I don?t understand how br1 can have
> connectivity,but I can really ping from VM1 to VM2.
>
>
> ________________________________
> ???? Jesse Gross <jesse at nicira.com>
> ???? ?? ? <wchunx416 at yahoo.cn>
> ??? OVSdiscuss <discuss at openvswitch.org>
> ????? 2013?1?23?, ???, 5:39 ??
> ??: Re: [ovs-discuss] GRE problem
>
> Your image is corrupted, please find another way to send it instead of
> as HTML email.
>
> From your description it sounds like there is no difference between
> the configurations except for the bridge name, is that true? I
> suspect that you have formed some sort of loop. Does your monitoring
> cause any additional packets to be generated (i.e. are you trying to
> do it over the network)?
>
> On Mon, Jan 21, 2013 at 5:21 AM, ?? ? <wchunx416 at yahoo.cn> wrote:
>> I have two hosts
>> HOST1:192.168.0.224
>> with VM1:192.168.0.33(VLAN=1)
>> HOST2:192.168.0.25
>> with VM2:192.168.0.44(VLAN=1)
>>
>> on HOST1
>> ovs-vsctl add-port br0 gre0 -- set interface gre0 type=gre
>> options:remote_ip=192.168.0.25
>>
>> ovs-vsctl show
>> 044f6b32-f6c0-4ce7-9d8b-41c9891d4aa7
>> Bridge "br0"
>> Port "gre0"
>> Interface "gre0"
>> type: gre
>> options: {remote_ip="192.168.0.25"}
>> Port "tap1"
>> tag: 1
>> Interface "tap1"
>> Port "eth1"
>> Interface "eth1"
>> Port "br0"
>> Interface "br0"
>> type: internal
>> ovs_version: "1.7.1"
>>
>> on HOST2
>> ovs-vsctl add-port br0 gre0 -- set interface gre0 type=gre
>> options:remote_ip=192.168.0.224
>>
>> I can ping from vm1 to vm2
>>
>> root at localhost:~# ping 192.168.0.44
>>
>> PING 192.168.0.44 (192.168.0.44) 56(84) bytes of data.
>>
>> 64 bytes from 192.168.0.44: icmp_seq=1 ttl=64 time=2.62 ms
>>
>> 64 bytes from 192.168.0.44: icmp_seq=2 ttl=64 time=3.74 ms
>>
>> 64 bytes from 192.168.0.44: icmp_seq=3 ttl=64 time=3.33 ms
>>
>> 64 bytes from 192.168.0.44: icmp_seq=4 ttl=64 time=2.10 ms
>>
>> 64 bytes from 192.168.0.44: icmp_seq=5 ttl=64 time=6.45 ms
>>
>> 64 bytes from 192.168.0.44: icmp_seq=6 ttl=64 time=3.97 ms
>>
>> 64 bytes from 192.168.0.44: icmp_seq=7 ttl=64 time=17.1 ms
>>
>> ^C
>>
>> --- 192.168.0.44 ping statistics ---
>>
>> 7 packets transmitted, 7 received, 0% packet loss, time 6009ms
>>
>> but when I used wireshark,I found too many packages on eth1,and HOST2
>> crashed soon.
>>
>>
>> Then I followed
>> http://networkstatic.net/open-vswitch-gre-tunnel-configuration/
>> add gre0 and tap1 to br1(a new bridge)instead of br0.
>>
>> on HOST1
>> ovs-vsctl show
>> 044f6b32-f6c0-4ce7-9d8b-41c9891d4aa7
>> Bridge "br0"
>> Port "br0"
>> Interface "br0"
>> type: internal
>> Port "eth1"
>> Interface "eth1"
>> Bridge "br1"
>> Port "br1"
>> Interface "br1"
>> type: internal
>> Port "tap1"
>> tag: 1
>> Interface "tap1"
>> Port "gre0"
>> Interface "gre0"
>> type: gre
>> options: {remote_ip="192.168.0.25"}
>> ovs_version: "1.7.1"
>>
>> I can ping from vm1 to vm2
>> root at localhost:~# ping 192.168.0.44
>>
>> PING 192.168.0.44 (192.168.0.44) 56(84) bytes of data.
>> 64 bytes from 192.168.0.44: icmp_seq=1 ttl=64 time=1.24 ms
>> 64 bytes from 192.168.0.44: icmp_seq=2 ttl=64 time=0.859 ms
>> 64 bytes from 192.168.0.44: icmp_seq=3 ttl=64 time=0.775 ms
>> 64 bytes from 192.168.0.44: icmp_seq=4 ttl=64 time=0.838 ms
>> 64 bytes from 192.168.0.44: icmp_seq=5 ttl=64 time=0.844 ms
>> 64 bytes from 192.168.0.44: icmp_seq=6 ttl=64 time=0.856 ms
>> 64 bytes from 192.168.0.44: icmp_seq=7 ttl=64 time=0.757 ms
>> 64 bytes from 192.168.0.44: icmp_seq=8 ttl=64 time=0.824 ms
>> 64 bytes from 192.168.0.44: icmp_seq=9 ttl=64 time=0.816 ms
>> ^C
>> --- 192.168.0.22 ping statistics ---
>> 9 packets transmitted, 9 received, 0% packet loss, time 8012ms
>> rtt min/avg/max/mdev = 0.757/0.868/1.249/0.142 ms
>>
>> And everything is ok.
>>
>> I want to know the reasons for the first case.Is there any mistakes?
>> Thanks.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> discuss mailing list
>> discuss at openvswitch.org
>> http://openvswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
>>
>
>
[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]
Configure |
About |
News |
Add a list |
Sponsored by KoreLogic