Thanks for the reply.

On Thursday of last week I used the nuclear option
and unconfigured and uninstalled SunRay on the x4150.
I then rebooted, installed, rebooted, and then configured.
I still had an error.  I looked in the logs and noted that
there was a complaint about the network connection not
allowed.  I ended up finding that there was no entry in
the /etc/netmasks file for the SunRay network (I was
comparing files on the 280 to the x4150).  I added
the an entry and then the SunRay just connected/worked.

I note that there was an entry in netmasks for the
system interface and also for virtual box.  Would
the virtual box entry cause a problem with the
SunRay install writing an entry into /etc/netmasks?

The current file contents are:

150.135.52.0    255.255.255.192
#VirtualBox_SectionStart
192.168.56.0 255.255.255.0
#VirtualBox_SectionEnd
192.168.132.0   255.255.255.0

(I added the last line).  The 280R has four SunRay
interfaces configured (one for each QFE port) using
networks 128, 129, 130 and 131 so I used 132 for
the x4150 not knowing whether using the default 128
on the x4150 would cause a problem as the same network
was in use on the 280R.  I had used the default on the
original install on the x4150 but changed it to 132 on
the reinstall.  Each of the 4 QFE ports on the 280R
is connected to a separate VPN.  Each VPN has a few
SunRays.

Solaris 10 Update 9, fully patched after I uninstalled
and rebooted before I reinstalled.

I assume (but that may not be a good thing) that SunRay
and Virtual Box can run on the same Solaris 10 host?  I'm
thinking about installing Windows Server in Virtual Box
as we have a license for the machine as it originally
ran Windows Server ...

Thanks again,

Stuart

On Apr 30, 2011, at 11:19 AM, ottomeister wrote:

> On Tue, Apr 26, 2011 at 4:46 PM, Stuart F. Biggar
> <[email protected]> wrote:
> <snip>
>> SunRay is (I think) 5.1.2 - I see that 140994-07 is installed.
> 
> Yes, if it has the -07 patch then it's 5.1.2.
> 
>> However, if I disconnect the network cable from the 280 QFE interface
>> and plug it into the e1000g3 interface on the x4150 configured to
>> provide SunRay services, I get a 24D box and then the SunRay restarts
>> in a continuous cycle.  If I replug the cables such that the SunRay
>> is on the 280R it just works again.
>> 
>> So, I'm a confused novice that could use some advice on trouble shooting.
> 
> 24x means that the DTU has been instructed by its current
> server to break that connection and make a new connection
> to some other server.  The IP address of the new target
> server should be shown beneath the server box on the right
> side of the 24x panel.  That IP address might give you a clue
> as to what's happening.
> 
> I'm wondering whether you've configured this new server into
> a host group with the existing 280R, and the x4150 is trying
> to send the DTU back to its existing session on the 280R.
> Run 'utgstatus' on the x4150 to find out whether it thinks
> it's participating in a group and, if so, who the group members
> are.
> 
> Another way to get a redirect is to configure the AMGH
> feature but that's unlikely in a small isolated deployment like
> yours appears to be.
> 
> If the answer doesn't jump out at you after examining the
> destination IP address and/or 'utgstatus' result, it would be
> interesting to see the entries that are written to
> /var/opt/SUNWut/log/messages on the x4150 while the
> DTU is attaching to this system.
> 
> OttoM.
> __
> Disclaimer: I am employed by Oracle. The statements and opinions
> expressed here are my own and do not necessarily represent those
> of Oracle Corporation.
> _______________________________________________
> SunRay-Users mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://www.filibeto.org/mailman/listinfo/sunray-users

_______________________________________________
SunRay-Users mailing list
[email protected]
http://www.filibeto.org/mailman/listinfo/sunray-users

Reply via email to