On Sat, 10 Feb 2018 09:54:49 +0100 Marko Zec <z...@fer.hr> wrote: > On Sat, 10 Feb 2018 08:52:21 +0100 > "O. Hartmann" <ohartm...@walstatt.org> wrote: > > > Am Fri, 09 Feb 2018 16:43:17 +0000 > > "Bjoern A. Zeeb" <bzeeb-li...@lists.zabbadoz.net> schrieb: > > > > > On 9 Feb 2018, at 16:22, O. Hartmann wrote: > > > > > > > Am Thu, 8 Feb 2018 09:31:15 +0100 > > > > "O. Hartmann" <ohartm...@walstatt.org> schrieb: > > > > > > > > Is this problem to trivial? > > > > > > I read through it yesterday and found myself in the position that I > > > need a whiteboard or paper and pencil or an ASCII art of your > > > situation. But by the time I made it to the question I was > > > basically lost. Could you massively simplify this and maybe > > > produce the ASCII art? > > > > > > /bz > > > _______________________________________________ > > > freebsd-curr...@freebsd.org mailing list > > > https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current > > > To unsubscribe, send any mail to > > > "freebsd-current-unsubscr...@freebsd.org" > > > > All right. > > > > I'm not much of an artist and at this very moment, I haven't much > > experience with neat ASCII art tools. But I'll provide a sketch > > later, but I also will simplify the situation. > > > > Consider three "vswitches", basically based on the creation of > > bridges, bridge0, bridge1, bridge2. Create at least three individual > > vnet-jails attached to each vbridge. Those jails have epair pseudo > > devices. The jail itself owns the "a-part" of the epair and the > > b-part is "member of the bridge". Each jail's epairXXXa has an IP > > assigned of the network the vswitch is part of. I mention a- and > > b-part of the epair here, because I thought it could matter, but I > > think for symmetry reasons it doesn't. > > > > Now consider a further, special jail. This jail is supposed to have > > three epair devices, each one is reaching into one of the vbridges. > > This jail is the router/routing jail. Later, this jail should filter > > via IPFW the traffic between the three vbridges according to rules, > > but this doesn't matter here, beacuase the basics are not working as > > expected. > > > > Now the problems. It doesn't matter on which jail of the three > > vswitches I login, the moment a vbridge has more than two member > > epairs (one is alway member of the routing jail, now consider a > > database jail and a webserver jail), pinging each jail or the routing > > jail fails. It works sometimes for a couple of ICMP packets and then > > stops. > > > > If each vbridge has only one member jail, I have NO PROBLEMS > > traversing accordingly to the static routing rules from one vbridge > > to any other, say from vbridge1 to vbridge0 or vbridge2 and any > > permutation of that. > > > > The moment any of the bridges gets an additional member epair > > interface (so the bridge has at least three members including the on > > reaching into the virtual router jail) the vbridge seems to operate > > unpredictable (to me). Pinging jails memeber of that vbridge are > > unreachable. > > > > Technical information: > > > > The kernel has options IPFIREWALL, VIMAGE. The host's ipfw (kernel) > > declines packets by default. Each jail is configured to have ipfw > > "open". > > > > Thanks for the patience. > > If you could provide a script which sets up the topology you described > in two lengthy posts then others could reproduce this, and your chances > of getting useful feedback would certainly increase. > > We also have a graphical tool (https://github.com/imunes/imunes) which > can set up a topology like you described in a few clicks of a mouse, > albeit using netgraph and ng_eiface instead of epairs, but I assume this > is irellevant as long as you are not aiming for maximum packet > throughputs. If you attempt to use this tool, note that selecting > "stpswitch" will create if_bridge instances, whereas "lanswitch" > creates ng_bridge instances. > > Good luck, > > Marko > > > > > > Kind regards, > > > > O. Hartmann > > _______________________________________________ > freebsd-curr...@freebsd.org mailing list > https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current > To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-current-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Hello Marko, thanks for your response. First of all: I looked at "imunes". From the first glimpse it looks great! Something really usefull; I regret not having a port for this tool or the chance to package it via poudriere. The problems I faced seem to be related to a bug Olivier Cochard-Labbe pointed me at: https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=176671 Checking the MAC of the epairs created revealed, that either doubles or even more occur on the host side of the epair (in my case, all the b-parts of an epair), or, if there is nothing irregular, then the a-parts (owned by the VIMAGE jail) have same MAC. The more jails I create, the more ambiguous MACs are present. It is the first time I ran into a more complex network topology and thanks for the hint using netgraph. Kind regards, Oliver _______________________________________________ firstname.lastname@example.org mailing list https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-jail To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-jail-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"