NOVELL FORUMS

atrofimov · #1 20-Oct-2009, 05:12 AM

Hi,

I am in the process of setting up a new SLES10SP2 server with 2x onboard Broadcom NICs and 4x Intel NICs, the idea is to use it to run a few XEN VMs. I have set up bond0 using all 4x Intel NICs and kept onboard NICs as eth0 and eth1. It just so happened that I started using eth1 along with bond0, not eth0 ( not configured ) so that's not really important. I used YaST to set up NICs and 'ip link', 'ip route' etc. to check NICs status, route etc.

Both eth1 and bond0 are on the same subnet, there're no VLANs and I've assigned an IP to each of them. Before I started setting up br0 moving on to XEN side of things I expected to be able to ping both eth1 and bond0 from a client ( located on the same subnet ).

Problem: turned out I could only ping this server if I had eth1 connected to the switch, no matter which IP of the two I used. On the server itself it was the same except for the ping would work when eth1 was disconnected if I used "ping -I bond0". I came across this thread :

Frustrating multihomed problem with SLES 10 SP2

that added to the confusion. Can I have two NICs on SLES configured with two different IPs so that traffic would traverse them depending on which IP I used to connect ( e.g. ssh or ping via IP1 or IP2 or use some Nagios like software to monitor link status for each NIC ). Besides, the host name is 'shared' ( in YaST as least ) so I can not assign different hostnames to those NICs. I was hoping to dedicate eth1 to a single Netware VM and bond0 to a mix of other VMs.

I then set up a bridge for bond0 ( I have the default route on Dom0 set for bond0 ), created a VM and now am getting 'no route to host' for any of the local hosts ( or any other hosts for that matter, can't even ping it from Dom0 ).

I know bond0 is working because if I completely remove eth1 and only leave bond0 everything seems to work. Besides, I can ping -I bond0 as I mentioned above.

I haven't posted any conf files, routing tables etc. which I can do tomorrow, I just would like to know - am I missing something, is this an unreasonable scenario, I've never had to deal that closely with the routing but it seems to be the problem here, I believe. Thanks.