Hi Lennert
thanks for your quick reply. i checked through the brctp showstp a bit and
noticed something odd (i have pasted the dump in this message). well, looks odd
to me anyway. (note -- green 10.2 ; yellow 10.1)
eth0 is going out over some bridge id that isnt green or yellow.
something tells me that is the culprit.
is there a way to correct that? this nic is onboard. maybe that is the problem?
anyway, just thought that i'd throw this out as well.
i didnt see any STP data in the tcpdumps. we arent running STP here anywhere
(not my decision to make)
thank you so much for your time and help. i really appreciate it.
matt
green
bridge id 8000.000103e81578
designated root 8000.000103e81578
root port 0 path cost 0
max age 20.00 bridge max age 20.00
hello time 2.00 bridge hello time 2.00
forward delay 15.00 bridge forward delay 15.00
ageing time 300.00 gc interval 4.00
hello timer 0.55 tcn timer 0.00
topology change timer 0.00 gc timer 0.55
flags
eth2 (1)
port id 8001 state forwarding
designated root 8000.000103e81578 path cost 100
designated bridge 8000.000103e81578 message age timer 0.00
designated port 8001 forward delay timer 0.00
designated cost 0 hold timer 0.55
flags
eth3 (2)
port id 8002 state forwarding
designated root 8000.000103e81578 path cost 100
designated bridge 8000.000103e81578 message age timer 0.00
designated port 8002 forward delay timer 0.00
designated cost 0 hold timer 0.55
flags
yellow
bridge id 8000.000103e8206c
designated root 8000.000103e81578
root port 1 path cost 110
max age 20.00 bridge max age 20.00
hello time 2.00 bridge hello time 2.00
forward delay 15.00 bridge forward delay 15.00
ageing time 300.00 gc interval 4.00
hello timer 0.00 tcn timer 0.00
topology change timer 0.00 gc timer 0.92
flags
eth0 (1)
port id 8001 state forwarding
designated root 8000.000103e81578 path cost 100
designated bridge 8000.0001e7356700 message age timer 1.88
designated port 8004 forward delay timer 0.00
designated cost 10 hold timer 0.00
flags
eth1 (2)
port id 8002 state forwarding
designated root 8000.000103e81578 path cost 100
designated bridge 8000.000103e8206c message age timer 0.00
designated port 8002 forward delay timer 0.00
designated cost 110 hold timer 0.88
flags
eth0 Link encap:Ethernet HWaddr 00:07:95:A4:B6:D2
UP BROADCAST RUNNING MULTICAST MTU:1500 Metric:1
RX packets:481924 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 frame:0
TX packets:3103 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 carrier:0
collisions:0 txqueuelen:100
RX bytes:92487461 (88.2 Mb) TX bytes:328283 (320.5 Kb)
Interrupt:10 Base address:0xdc00
eth1 Link encap:Ethernet HWaddr 00:01:03:E8:20:6C
UP BROADCAST RUNNING MULTICAST MTU:1500 Metric:1
RX packets:2827 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 frame:0
TX packets:481371 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 carrier:0
collisions:0 txqueuelen:100
RX bytes:317732 (310.2 Kb) TX bytes:92409128 (88.1 Mb)
Interrupt:11 Base address:0xd800
eth2 Link encap:Ethernet HWaddr 00:01:03:E8:15:78
UP BROADCAST RUNNING MULTICAST MTU:1500 Metric:1
RX packets:122447 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 frame:0
TX packets:28733 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 carrier:0
collisions:0 txqueuelen:100
> I would say that there is a loop in your network somewhere (i.e.
> the 10.1/16 and 10.2/16 subnets might not be as separate as you
> thought). This you can try:
>
> 1. brctl showstp br0, brctl showstp br1
> Check whether you have ports in the 'blocking' state or
> not.
>
> 2. tcpdump -i br0, tcpdump -i br1 (with a recent tcpdump)
> Check whether the spanning tree packets that you see
> contain the same 'root' value or not.
>
>
>
> On Mon, Mar 25, 2002 at 04:50:07AM +0000, Matt Critcher wrote:
>
> >
> > Hi all.
> >
> > I have been digging through the mailing list archives and google for the past
> > couple of days looking for an answer, but have had little success.
> >
> > here's my network setup.
> >
> > i have a t-1, a cisco 2630 router, several hp4000M switches, and 2 VLAN
> > segments. i need to make 2 bridges on a i386 (750 athlon, RH72, 2.4.16, latest
> > from bridge.sf.net, 3c59x). yes, i know that there is the whole VLAN thing but
> > i am using TC so i need to break it up this way for various reasons (and my
> > problems are before i try to initiate TC). also, because i thought that it
> > might be the router, i tried it again between 2 of these switches and same
> > results (all traffic on the vlans is untagged)
> >
> > anyway, here is a little pic (sorry if it looks distored) to help explain.
> >
> >
> >
> > |---10.2/16--| eth0,eth1 |-----
> > ---WAN-----ROUTER------| | bridge box | | hp4000M switch(vlans)
> > |---10.1/16--| eth2,eth3 |-----
> >
> >
> > i set up the bridges this way
> >
> > brctl addbr br0
> > ifconfig eth0 0.0.0.0 up
> > ifconfig eth1 0.0.0.0 up
> > brctl addif br0 eth0
> > brctl addif br0 eth1
> > ifconfig br0 0.0.0.0 up
> >
> > brctl addbr br1
> > ifconfig eth2 0.0.0.0 up
> > ifconfig eth3 0.0.0.0 up
> > brctl addif br1 eth2
> > brctl addif br1 eth3
> > ifconfig br1 0.0.0.0 up
> >
> > i have also tried this without the 0.0.0.0 (just ifconfig eth/br up), and with
> > stp off. i have tried with addresses on the bridges and ethX.
> >
> > the problem is that no matter how i shuffle it around, the bridge created on
> > 10.2/16 only works if the bridge on 10.1/16 is down. it doesnt matter which i
> > make br0 or which i add first. if i bring up the bridge on 10.1, it just dont
> > work. tcpdump -i on 10.1 shows all the normal traffic. same thing on 10.2
> > shows only arp and netbios-datagrams.
> >
> > this is really weird. i have replaced the nics thinking that one could be bad.
> > i have made sure that each nic is on its irq, and have replaced the network
> > cables with new, store-bought ones.
> >
> > i'm stumped. as i mentioned before, tc or iptables is not bound to anything.
> > this is just straight-out-of-the-box bridging.
> >
> > anyone out there had a simular problem? any advice?
> >
> > i really appreciate your help.
> >
> > thanks!!
> >
> > matt
> >
> >
> >
> > ---------------------------------------------
> > Visit http://www.neark.org
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Bridge mailing list
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > http://www.math.leidenuniv.nl/mailman/listinfo/bridge
> _______________________________________________
> Bridge mailing list
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> http://www.math.leidenuniv.nl/mailman/listinfo/bridge
>
******************
If Bill Gates had a dime for every time a Windows box crashed ... oh, wait a
minute -- he already does.
******************
---------------------------------------------
Visit http://www.neark.org
_______________________________________________
Bridge mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.math.leidenuniv.nl/mailman/listinfo/bridge
