Sounds like CR 6798106 that we closed as we couldn't reproduce?
Andrew Gabriel wrote: > Michael Lim wrote: >> redirecting to crossbow-discuss... >> >> On 03/12/09 15:17, Andrew Gabriel wrote: >>> In snv_108, I'm playing with creating a vnic over an etherstub, and >>> I might not be doing it right, but the behaviour I'm seeing doesn't >>> look right either. >>> >>> So this is what I did... >>> >>> # dladm create-etherstub estub0 >>> # dladm create-vnic -l estub0 vnic0 >>> # ifconfig vnic0 plumb >>> # ifconfig vnic0 192.168.128.1 netmask 255.255.255.0 broadcast + up >>> # >>> >>> That seems to work, and I had virtualbox also attach to vnic0 and >>> traffic passes through vnic0 OK. >>> >>> Then I reboot. I wasn't expecting the interfaced to be plumbed >>> anymore, but I was expecting the vnic0 and estub0 to still be there. >>> They aren't: >>> >>> # ifconfig vnic0 plumb >>> ifconfig: SIOCSLIFNAME for ip: vnic0: no such interface >>> # dladm show-etherstub >>> # dladm show-vnic >>> # >>> >>> Except maybe they are: >>> >>> # dladm create-etherstub estub0 >>> dladm: etherstub creation failed: object already exists >>> # dladm create-vnic -l estub0 vnic0 >>> dladm: vnic creation over estub0 failed: object already exists >>> # >>> >>> I can fortunately delete them and then recreate them. >>> >>> # dladm delete-etherstub estub0 >>> # dladm delete-vnic vnic0 >>> # >>> >>> (whereas if I try deleting estub1 or vnic1, neither of which I have >>> ever created, that gives an error as expected). >>> >>> So is this broken, or doesn't it work like I think it should? >> it's broken. everything that you did should work. >> >> i suspect that the #dladm up-vnic in the net-physical SMF service >> tried to >> create the vnic before the etherstub. there should probably be an >> error in >> the SMF log file. >> >> i can't explain the missing entry in #dladm show-etherstub though. > > To answer my own question, the fault is that if you are running NWAM, > nothing during boot actually instantiates the persistent configuration > for vnics and ethersubs (nor several other objects, by inspection of > the start methods), so although the objects are in the persistent > configuration, they never get loaded into the kernel. > > You can force the persistent configuration to be loaded by running > > # dladm up-vnic > > So I guess what I'm after is svc:/network/physical:nwam on some > interfaces and svc:/network/physical:default on other interfaces. > Would I be right in thinking NWAM is not configurable to this extent? >
