Difference between revisions of "Bridge doesn't forward packets"
(no first level headings please) |
m (VE->container, VE0->CT0) |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
Sometimes bridge can mysteriously drop the packets and not forward them. | Sometimes bridge can mysteriously drop the packets and not forward them. | ||
| − | e.g. eyck user experienced a problem when some of the broadcasts were not delivered to | + | e.g. eyck user experienced a problem when some of the broadcasts were not |
| + | delivered to container via the bridge. | ||
Original report and the thread: [http://forum.openvz.org/index.php?t=tree&th=4052& forum thread] | Original report and the thread: [http://forum.openvz.org/index.php?t=tree&th=4052& forum thread] | ||
| Line 6: | Line 7: | ||
== Simplest configuration == | == Simplest configuration == | ||
| − | + | Container #101 with veth interface (veth101.0) connected to eth0 physical interface via bridge. | |
== Problem statement == | == Problem statement == | ||
| − | We faced a situation when some of the broadcast packets were not delivered to the | + | We faced a situation when some of the broadcast packets were not delivered to |
| − | Actually it could happen with any packets, not with the broadcasts only. But broadcasts are | + | the container. Actually it could happen with any packets, not with the |
| − | simpler and obviously should have been delivered to all the networking interfaces with no doubt. | + | broadcasts only. But broadcasts are simpler and obviously should have been |
| + | delivered to all the networking interfaces with no doubt. | ||
| − | Using tcpdump we see that BOOTP/DHCP request is visible on br0 interface in the host system ( | + | Using tcpdump we see that BOOTP/DHCP request is visible on br0 interface in |
| + | the host system ([[CT0]]): | ||
15:21:52.258220 00:1b:d5:2c:bf:38 > ff:ff:ff:ff:ff:ff, ethertype IPv4 (0x0800), length 350: 0.0.0.0.68 > 255.255.255.255.67: | 15:21:52.258220 00:1b:d5:2c:bf:38 > ff:ff:ff:ff:ff:ff, ethertype IPv4 (0x0800), length 350: 0.0.0.0.68 > 255.255.255.255.67: | ||
BOOTP/DHCP, Request from 00:1b:d5:2c:bf:38, length 308 | BOOTP/DHCP, Request from 00:1b:d5:2c:bf:38, length 308 | ||
| Line 20: | Line 23: | ||
BOOTP/DHCP, Reply, length 300 | BOOTP/DHCP, Reply, length 300 | ||
| − | However, eth0 inside | + | However, eth0 inside container receives only 2nd packet with BOOTP/DHCP reply and doesn't see the 1st one with the request itself: |
15:21:52.291145 00:08:02:ac:36:20 > ff:ff:ff:ff:ff:ff, ethertype IPv4 (0x0800), length 342: 172.17.8.254.67 > 255.255.255.255.68: | 15:21:52.291145 00:08:02:ac:36:20 > ff:ff:ff:ff:ff:ff, ethertype IPv4 (0x0800), length 342: 172.17.8.254.67 > 255.255.255.255.68: | ||
BOOTP/DHCP, Reply, length 300 | BOOTP/DHCP, Reply, length 300 | ||
Revision as of 12:01, 11 March 2008
Sometimes bridge can mysteriously drop the packets and not forward them. e.g. eyck user experienced a problem when some of the broadcasts were not delivered to container via the bridge.
Original report and the thread: forum thread
Simplest configuration
Container #101 with veth interface (veth101.0) connected to eth0 physical interface via bridge.
Problem statement
We faced a situation when some of the broadcast packets were not delivered to the container. Actually it could happen with any packets, not with the broadcasts only. But broadcasts are simpler and obviously should have been delivered to all the networking interfaces with no doubt.
Using tcpdump we see that BOOTP/DHCP request is visible on br0 interface in the host system (CT0):
15:21:52.258220 00:1b:d5:2c:bf:38 > ff:ff:ff:ff:ff:ff, ethertype IPv4 (0x0800), length 350: 0.0.0.0.68 > 255.255.255.255.67: BOOTP/DHCP, Request from 00:1b:d5:2c:bf:38, length 308 15:21:52.287269 00:08:02:ac:36:20 > ff:ff:ff:ff:ff:ff, ethertype IPv4 (0x0800), length 342: 172.17.8.254.67 > 255.255.255.255.68: BOOTP/DHCP, Reply, length 300
However, eth0 inside container receives only 2nd packet with BOOTP/DHCP reply and doesn't see the 1st one with the request itself:
15:21:52.291145 00:08:02:ac:36:20 > ff:ff:ff:ff:ff:ff, ethertype IPv4 (0x0800), length 342: 172.17.8.254.67 > 255.255.255.255.68: BOOTP/DHCP, Reply, length 300
Resolution
It is not obvious at all, but bridges (though have own ebtables filters) do also call iptables FORWARD chain when forwarding packets between interfaces. Thus your FORWARD iptables rules should allow all the packets which are supposed to go through.
in our case eyck had a default DROP policy on FORWARD and had to add:
iptables -A FORWARD -d 255.255.255.255 -j ACCEPT
to fix the issue.
Credits
Many credits to Dariush Pietrzak, who patiently helped to debug this.
