Michael: This looks fine. What we're interested in finding in the trace output is the reception and handling of the packet that TRACERTE sends to the VM system (the one that times out).
Romney On Wed, 18 Dec 2002 12:19:34 -0500 Coffin Michael C said: >Hi Romney, > >I ran a trace which is too big to include here, but I'm seeing "Passed Route >F" and "DontRoute F" in the trace, here's a snip: > >DTCPDO065I DispatchDatagram: Dest 152.225.118.49, protocol 17 dispatch mode >0, P >assed Route F, DontRoute F > >DTCPDO066I DispatchDatagram releases LastRouteEntry > >DTCPDO080I FindRoute looking for route for: 152.225.118.49 > >DTCPDO077I FindRoute found HostRTE for 152.225.118.49 on interface CTC504 > >DTCPDO067I DispatchDatagram allocates LastRouteEntry > >DTCPDO044I Ipdown: Link: Link Name: CTC504, Link Type: CTC, Dev Name: >CTC504, De >v Type: CTC, Queuesize: 0 > >DTCPDO046I Ipdown: FirstHop 152.225.118.49 > >DTCPDO027I IP-down: ShouldFragment: Datagram: 78 Packet size:1492 >DTCPRC001I version: 4 >DTCPRC002I Internet Header Length: 5 = 20 bytes >DTCPRC009I Type of Service:Precedence = Routine >DTCPRC010I Total Length: 78 bytes >DTCPRC011I Identification: 37557 >DTCPRC009I Flags: May Fragment, Last Fragment >DTCPRC009I Fragment Offset: 0 >DTCPRC019I Time To Live: 124 >DTCPRC020I Protocol: UDP >DTCPRC021I Header CheckSum: 56509 >DTCPRC022I Source Address: 98E12738 >DTCPRC023I Destination Address: 98E17631 >DTCIPU031I IP-up examining: >DTCPRC001I version: 4 >DTCPRC002I Internet Header Length: 5 = 20 bytes >DTCPRC009I Type of Service:Precedence = Internetwork control >DTCPRC010I Total Length: 106 bytes >DTCPRC011I Identification: 1057 >DTCPRC009I Flags: May Fragment, Last Fragment >DTCPRC009I Fragment Offset: 0 > >DTCPRC019I Time To Live: 255 > >DTCPRC020I Protocol: ICMP > >DTCPRC021I Header CheckSum: 59269 > >DTCPRC022I Source Address: 98E17631 > >DTCPRC023I Destination Address: 98E12738 > >DTCIPU037I IP-up: datagram ID 1057, len 106, Protocol ICMP from >152.225.118.4 >9 > >DTCIPU040I IP-up: forward datagram > >DTCPDO065I DispatchDatagram: Dest 152.225.39.56, protocol 1 dispatch mode 0, >Pas >sed Route F, DontRoute F > >DTCPDO066I DispatchDatagram releases LastRouteEntry > >DTCPDO080I FindRoute looking for route for: 152.225.39.56 > >DTCPDO077I FindRoute found DefaultRTE for * on interface SHUTTLE3 > >DTCPDO067I DispatchDatagram allocates LastRouteEntry > >DTCPDO044I Ipdown: Link: Link Name: SHUTTLE3, Link Type: ETHERNET, Dev Name: >SHU >TTLE3, Dev Type: LCS, Queuesize: 0 > >DTCPDO046I Ipdown: FirstHop 152.225.118.1 > > >In the trace "SHUTTLE3" is our gigabit connection, 152.225.39.56 is the IP >address of the Win2K workstation I ran the tracert from, 152.225.118.49 is >the address I was tracing (a Linux/390 guest VCTC'd to the TCPIP at >152.225.118.46). > >Is this perhaphs because I have not provided explicit routing, but rather >use the "DefaultRoute" in VM's TCPIP configuration? > > >Michael Coffin, VM Systems Programmer >Internal Revenue Service - Room 6527 >1111 Constitution Avenue, N.W. >Washington, D.C. 20224 > >Voice: (202) 927-4188 FAX: (202) 622-3123 >[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > >-----Original Message----- >From: Romney White [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] >Sent: Wednesday, December 18, 2002 10:59 AM >To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >Subject: Re: Odd TraceRoute To Linux/390 Guests via VM TCPIP > > >Michael: > >Run the test with TRACE IPUP IPDOWN ICMP enabled. It looks as though the >packet is being dropped by VM TCP/IP. The trace will show what is going on. > >Romney > >On Wed, 18 Dec 2002 10:45:19 -0500 Coffin Michael C said: >>Hi Rob, >> >>Yes, pinging works fine to/from the guests. In fact all IP traffic >>to/from the guests works fine - but traceroute shows this timeout at >>.46 (the VM TCPIP server). I'd just like to understand why it times >>out and clear it up if possible. >> >>I'm not sure what you mean by "the status of the VCTC device". It's >>pairs are coupled and working fine or we wouldn't be able to talk >>between the Linux/390 and VM TCPIP machines. >> >>-TIA >> >>Michael Coffin, VM Systems Programmer >>Internal Revenue Service - Room 6527 >>1111 Constitution Avenue, N.W. >>Washington, D.C. 20224 >> >>Voice: (202) 927-4188 FAX: (202) 622-3123 >>[EMAIL PROTECTED] >> >> >> >>-----Original Message----- >>From: Rob Schwartz [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] >>Sent: Wednesday, December 18, 2002 10:43 AM >>To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >>Subject: Re: Odd TraceRoute To Linux/390 Guests via VM TCPIP >> >> >>Can you ping from VM to .49? >> >>What's the status of the VCTC device? >> >>Can you ping from the .49 Linux machine to .46? >> >> >>Robert C Schwartz >>Technical Services >>Boscovs Department Stores LLC >>610-929-7387 >>[EMAIL PROTECTED] >> >>----- Original Message ----- >>From: "Coffin Michael C" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >>To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >>Sent: Wednesday, December 18, 2002 10:20 AM >>Subject: Re: Odd TraceRoute To Linux/390 Guests via VM TCPIP >> >> >>> Arrggh - I have guests at both .49 and .50, I evidently included the >>> trace to .49 (same results). Strike .50 in my note and replace it >>> with .49 >>(sorry >>> for the confusion). >>> >>> Michael Coffin, VM Systems Programmer >>> Internal Revenue Service - Room 6527 >>> 1111 Constitution Avenue, N.W. >>> Washington, D.C. 20224 >>> >>> Voice: (202) 927-4188 FAX: (202) 622-3123 >>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] >>> >>> >>> >>> -----Original Message----- >>> From: Rob Schwartz [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] >>> Sent: Wednesday, December 18, 2002 10:21 AM >>> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >>> Subject: Re: Odd TraceRoute To Linux/390 Guests via VM TCPIP >>> >>> >>> Hey Michael, >>> >>> Am I missing something here... What is 152.225.118.49???? >>> >>> Rob >>> >>> Robert C Schwartz >>> Technical Services >>> Boscovs Department Stores LLC >>> 610-929-7387 >>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] >>> >>> ----- Original Message ----- >>> From: "Michael Coffin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >>> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >>> Sent: Wednesday, December 18, 2002 10:02 AM >>> Subject: Odd TraceRoute To Linux/390 Guests via VM TCPIP >>> >>> >>> > (Crossposted on VMESA-L and Linux-VM) >>> > >>> > Hi Folks, >>> > >>> > I'm in the process of implementing gigabit ethernet for a client >>> > and am very curious about something. I have a TCPIP stack on VM >>> > (VM/ESA >>> > 2.4.0) with a dedicated gigabit card at IP address 152.225.118.46. >>> > I have a Linux/390 guest virtual machine VCTC coupled to this TCPIP >>> > virtual machine at IP address 152.225.118.50. Take a look at the >>> > traceroute below, when I trace to .46 it's nice and clean. However >>> > when I trace to .50 .46 times out. Any idea what causes this? VM's >>> > TCPIP is proxyarping for these guests, by the way. >>> > >>> > I:\>tracert 152.225.118.46 >>> > >>> > Tracing route to 152.225.118.46 over a maximum of 30 hops >>> > >>> > 1 <10 ms <10 ms <10 ms 152.225.39.2 >>> > 2 <10 ms <10 ms <10 ms 152.225.119.194 >>> > 3 <10 ms <10 ms <10 ms 152.225.46.36 >>> > 4 <10 ms <10 ms <10 ms 152.225.118.46 >>> > >>> > Trace complete. >>> > >>> > I:\>tracert 152.225.118.49 >>> > >>> > Tracing route to 152.225.118.49 over a maximum of 30 hops >>> > >>> > 1 <10 ms <10 ms <10 ms 152.225.39.2 >>> > 2 <10 ms <10 ms <10 ms 152.225.119.194 >>> > 3 <10 ms <10 ms <10 ms 152.225.46.36 >>> > 4 * * * Request timed out. >>> > 5 <10 ms <10 ms <10 ms 152.225.118.49 >>> > >>> > Trace complete. >>> > >>> > Thanks in advance. :) >>> > >>> > -Michael Coffin
