On Tue, 2007-06-12 at 17:16 -0400, Jim McCusker wrote: > > No, it's definitely on the host.
Hrm. Yes. This is as I expected. The vmware interface of the host is doing the NATting. I mean the 192.168.88.2 address is the address of the guest, not the host. > This seems to be the culprit: > > Jun 12 17:00:13 chai kernel: LustreError: > 12198:0:(acceptor.c:422:lnet_acceptor()) Refusing connection from > 128.36.115.10: insecure port 35203 This is as I was expecting, but hoping it was not. One strategy in NATting is to only reassign a source port if the port the NATted connection wants is already being used. If it's not, don't NAT it. That helps NATted connections look more natural where they can. Unfortunately it seems VMWare is not employing this technique and is always NATting ports (assuming you are not using 988 on the host for anything... do you have a lustre client running there too?) > We seem to be remapping to high ports, a common strategy when using > NAT. Right. > Is there a way of disabling this check? Good question. One which I don't know the answer to I'm afraid. b. _______________________________________________ Lustre-discuss mailing list [email protected] https://mail.clusterfs.com/mailman/listinfo/lustre-discuss
