Re: [zones-discuss] [brandz-discuss] Creating a Virtualization Community Group
On 8/7/07, Nils Nieuwejaar [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Tue 08/07/07 at 16:18 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Discussion on the OGB-discuss list regarding creating a LDOM (Logical Domain) Community, has again brought up the question of whether to form a combined virtualization community group. (With XEN, LDOM, and Zones all being working groups in the CG, and individual projects likely falling within the scope of a working group.). To do this we would need buy-in from the existing XEN and Zones community groups, as it would be relatively pointless to do this without these them. I am not aware of any major reasons that someone might be opposed to this. Please feel free to either voice your support or opposition. (Also, I think it would add some weight to the proposal if community group leaders and core contributers are willing to sponsor this change.) I think we went through this a couple of months ago, and all the interested parties were fine with that idea. I don't remember any official word as to why the idea was scuttled. Nils Probably for the same reason this thread almost died. (It unfortunately got caught in a filter.) It seems there is a majority of people in favor of this. What do we need to do to make it happen? -- - Brian Gupta http://opensolaris.org/os/project/nycosug/ ___ zones-discuss mailing list zones-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [zones-discuss] [brandz-discuss] Creating a Virtualization Community Group
Brandorr writes: It seems there is a majority of people in favor of this. What do we need to do to make it happen? I think the main barrier is getting the LDoms team to agree. They seem to feel that they need a separate community from the rest of the virtualization mechanisms on Solaris, and that a common community would serve no useful purpose. I don't quite agree, but in our last OGB meeting, we did approve the LDoms community proposal. Going ahead with a virtualization community that _doesn't_ involve LDoms seems much more feasible to me. -- James Carlson, Solaris Networking [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sun Microsystems / 1 Network Drive 71.232W Vox +1 781 442 2084 MS UBUR02-212 / Burlington MA 01803-2757 42.496N Fax +1 781 442 1677 ___ zones-discuss mailing list zones-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [zones-discuss] [xen-discuss] [brandz-discuss] Creating a Virtualization Community Group
James Carlson wrote: Brandorr writes: It seems there is a majority of people in favor of this. What do we need to do to make it happen? I think the main barrier is getting the LDoms team to agree. They seem to feel that they need a separate community from the rest of the virtualization mechanisms on Solaris, and that a common community would serve no useful purpose. The LDoms team requested that an LDoms community be created in keeping with the existing BrandZ, Xen and Zones communities (i.e. created on an equal footing to those communities). We asked for an LDoms community so that we could get up and running now independently of discussions to create an overall Virtualization community. I don't quite agree, but in our last OGB meeting, we did approve the LDoms community proposal. Going ahead with a virtualization community that _doesn't_ involve LDoms seems much more feasible to me. The LDoms community would be happy to be part of an umbrella Virtualization community involving the BrandZ, LDoms, Xen and Zones communities (or as projects - depending on what OS.o process is ultimately decided on). Once the LDoms Community have a place to put email lists, webpages and code repositories the discussions that are LDoms specific can happen there and the discussions and collaborations that span all the communities can happen in the Virtualization community. Hopefully as the LDoms community comes up to speed, those of us who have not been vocal on OS.o aliases can contribute more to all the communities. The LDoms community would be more that satisfied to be part of an overall cohesive virtualization community -- Liam ___ zones-discuss mailing list zones-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [zones-discuss] [xen-discuss] [brandz-discuss] Creating a Virtualization Community Group
Liam Merwick writes: The LDoms community would be happy to be part of an umbrella Virtualization community involving the BrandZ, LDoms, Xen and Zones communities (or as projects - depending on what OS.o process is ultimately decided on). This isn't the rationale that was provided to the OGB. The rationale provided looks more like this: http://mail.opensolaris.org/pipermail/ogb-discuss/2007-August/002239.html and this: http://mail.opensolaris.org/pipermail/ogb-discuss/2007-August/002250.html That is, LDoms are special. We were told rather directly that there was no point in having a Virtualization community because there was _NOTHING_ that could be shared between these projects -- no high level management or coordination, no tools support, and no joint projects. If that's not true, then it certainly comes as news to me. the communities. The LDoms community would be more that satisfied to be part of an overall cohesive virtualization community Then I don't understand why the repeated requests by OGB members and others to go this direction -- to create a Virtualization community to cover LDoms, Xen, Zones, and others -- were rejected by the LDoms proponents. The only ones in favor of the broader community were the other groups, such as Xen: http://mail.opensolaris.org/pipermail/ogb-discuss/2007-August/002234.html -- James Carlson, Solaris Networking [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sun Microsystems / 1 Network Drive 71.232W Vox +1 781 442 2084 MS UBUR02-212 / Burlington MA 01803-2757 42.496N Fax +1 781 442 1677 ___ zones-discuss mailing list zones-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [zones-discuss] [xen-discuss] [brandz-discuss] Creating a Virtualization Community Group
On Thu 08/23/07 at 09:26 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Liam Merwick writes: The LDoms community would be happy to be part of an umbrella Virtualization community involving the BrandZ, LDoms, Xen and Zones communities (or as projects - depending on what OS.o process is ultimately decided on). This isn't the rationale that was provided to the OGB. The rationale provided looks more like this: http://mail.opensolaris.org/pipermail/ogb-discuss/2007-August/002239.html and this: http://mail.opensolaris.org/pipermail/ogb-discuss/2007-August/002250.html That is, LDoms are special. We were told rather directly that there was no point in having a Virtualization community because there was _NOTHING_ that could be shared between these projects -- no high level management or coordination, no tools support, and no joint projects. If that's not true, then it certainly comes as news to me. It's certainly not true. Representatives of all of these teams recently spent several days in a woefully overcrowded room hashing out exactly where these areas of overlap are. If anything, the zones project was the odd man out, since they virtualize at a different level of the stack than Xen and LDoms. Nils ___ zones-discuss mailing list zones-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [zones-discuss] [xen-discuss] [brandz-discuss] Creating a Virtualization Community Group
Nils Nieuwejaar writes: It's certainly not true. I didn't really think it was, but that's the basis for the OGB approval of the new LDoms community. Representatives of all of these teams recently spent several days in a woefully overcrowded room hashing out exactly where these areas of overlap are. If anything, the zones project was the odd man out, since they virtualize at a different level of the stack than Xen and LDoms. Even with Zones, I'd expect software packaging, install, and maintenance issues to be shared (at least in part) with the other groups. -- James Carlson, Solaris Networking [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sun Microsystems / 1 Network Drive 71.232W Vox +1 781 442 2084 MS UBUR02-212 / Burlington MA 01803-2757 42.496N Fax +1 781 442 1677 ___ zones-discuss mailing list zones-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [zones-discuss] network issue from local zone
On 8/23/07, Enda O'Connor [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Asif Iqbal wrote:
(root)@global:~$ ifconfig -a
lo0: flags=2001000849UP,LOOPBACK,RUNNING,MULTICAST,IPv4,VIRTUAL mtu
8232 index 1
inet 127.0.0.1 netmask ff00
lo0:1: flags=2001000849UP,LOOPBACK,RUNNING,MULTICAST,IPv4,VIRTUAL
mtu 8232 index 1
zone lab-mns-02
inet 127.0.0.1 netmask ff00
e1000g0: flags=1000843UP,BROADCAST,RUNNING,MULTICAST,IPv4 mtu 1500 index 2
inet 36.151.189.55 netmask ff00 broadcast 63.151.189.255
ether 0:14:4f:3f:eb:30
aggr1: flags=1000842BROADCAST,RUNNING,MULTICAST,IPv4 mtu 1500 index 3
inet 0.0.0.0 netmask 0
ether 0:14:4f:3f:eb:31
aggr1:1: flags=1000843UP,BROADCAST,RUNNING,MULTICAST,IPv4 mtu 1500 index 3
zone lab-mns-02
inet 36.151.189.15 netmask ff00 broadcast 63.151.189.255
Hi
is the broadcast of 63.151.189.255 a typo by any chance, looks like it
should be 36.151
Enda
That is definitely a typo. Good catch.
I tried to remove the aggregated interface and just used regualr
interface for the zone and it works absolutely perfect.
So the problem lies in aggregated interface.
(root)@global:~$ netstat -nr
Routing Table: IPv4
Destination Gateway Flags Ref Use Interface
- - -- -
36.151.189.0 36.151.189.55U 1 38682 e1000g0
224.0.0.036.151.189.55U 1 0 e1000g0
default 36.151.189.254 UG1 44483
127.0.0.1127.0.0.1UH21186066 lo0
(root)@mayhem:~$ zlogin lab-mns-02
[Connected to zone 'lab-mns-02' pts/2]
Last login: Wed Aug 22 14:55:36 on pts/2
Sun Microsystems Inc. SunOS 5.10 Generic January 2005
# bash
bash-3.00# netstat -nr
Routing Table: IPv4
Destination Gateway Flags Ref Use Interface
- - -- -
36.151.189.0 36.151.189.15U 1168 aggr1:1
224.0.0.036.151.189.15U 1 0 aggr1:1
default 36.151.189.254 UG1 44484
ping from this local zone to 36.151.189.254 is failing
Is the issue on dladm that I used to bulld the network interface
(root)@global:~$ dladm show-aggr -L
key: 1 (0x0001) policy: L4 address: 0:14:4f:3f:eb:31 (auto)
LACP mode: active LACP timer: short
deviceactivity timeout aggregatable sync coll dist defaulted
expired
e1000g1 active short yes nono no nono
e1000g3 active short yes nono no nono
(root)@global:~$ dladm show-aggr -s
key: 1 ipackets rbytes opackets obytes %ipkts %opkts
Total121808031 9575058793 8695445 1108668125
e1000g1 60693097 4773628658 4381671 556553100
49.850.4
e1000g3 61114934 4801430135 4313774 552115025
50.249.6
--
Asif Iqbal
PGP Key: 0xE62693C5 KeyServer: pgp.mit.edu
___
zones-discuss mailing list
zones-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [zones-discuss] network issue from local zone
Asif Iqbal wrote: On 8/23/07, Enda O'Connor [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Asif Iqbal wrote: (root)@global:~$ ifconfig -a lo0: flags=2001000849UP,LOOPBACK,RUNNING,MULTICAST,IPv4,VIRTUAL mtu 8232 index 1 inet 127.0.0.1 netmask ff00 lo0:1: flags=2001000849UP,LOOPBACK,RUNNING,MULTICAST,IPv4,VIRTUAL mtu 8232 index 1 zone lab-mns-02 inet 127.0.0.1 netmask ff00 e1000g0: flags=1000843UP,BROADCAST,RUNNING,MULTICAST,IPv4 mtu 1500 index 2 inet 36.151.189.55 netmask ff00 broadcast 63.151.189.255 ether 0:14:4f:3f:eb:30 aggr1: flags=1000842BROADCAST,RUNNING,MULTICAST,IPv4 mtu 1500 index 3 inet 0.0.0.0 netmask 0 ether 0:14:4f:3f:eb:31 aggr1:1: flags=1000843UP,BROADCAST,RUNNING,MULTICAST,IPv4 mtu 1500 index 3 zone lab-mns-02 inet 36.151.189.15 netmask ff00 broadcast 63.151.189.255 Hi is the broadcast of 63.151.189.255 a typo by any chance, looks like it should be 36.151 Enda That is definitely a typo. Good catch. I tried to remove the aggregated interface and just used regualr interface for the zone and it works absolutely perfect. So the problem lies in aggregated interface. aggregated interfaces should work, have you installed 125120-03 ( e1000g patch )? Might help. Enda (root)@global:~$ netstat -nr Routing Table: IPv4 Destination Gateway Flags Ref Use Interface - - -- - 36.151.189.0 36.151.189.55U 1 38682 e1000g0 224.0.0.036.151.189.55U 1 0 e1000g0 default 36.151.189.254 UG1 44483 127.0.0.1127.0.0.1UH21186066 lo0 (root)@mayhem:~$ zlogin lab-mns-02 [Connected to zone 'lab-mns-02' pts/2] Last login: Wed Aug 22 14:55:36 on pts/2 Sun Microsystems Inc. SunOS 5.10 Generic January 2005 # bash bash-3.00# netstat -nr Routing Table: IPv4 Destination Gateway Flags Ref Use Interface - - -- - 36.151.189.0 36.151.189.15U 1168 aggr1:1 224.0.0.036.151.189.15U 1 0 aggr1:1 default 36.151.189.254 UG1 44484 ping from this local zone to 36.151.189.254 is failing Is the issue on dladm that I used to bulld the network interface (root)@global:~$ dladm show-aggr -L key: 1 (0x0001) policy: L4 address: 0:14:4f:3f:eb:31 (auto) LACP mode: active LACP timer: short deviceactivity timeout aggregatable sync coll dist defaulted expired e1000g1 active short yes nono no nono e1000g3 active short yes nono no nono (root)@global:~$ dladm show-aggr -s key: 1 ipackets rbytes opackets obytes %ipkts %opkts Total121808031 9575058793 8695445 1108668125 e1000g1 60693097 4773628658 4381671 556553100 49.850.4 e1000g3 61114934 4801430135 4313774 552115025 50.249.6 ___ zones-discuss mailing list zones-discuss@opensolaris.org
