Re: vmnet errors - Ubuntu

This is a discussion on Re: vmnet errors - Ubuntu ; Bit Twister wrote: > On Sat, 8 Sep 2007 10:48:12 -0400, Joe LaVigne wrote: > > > > You are missing the point. 17x.1x.x.x is on the same machine. > > No I am not missing the point. On the ...

+ Reply to Thread
Results 1 to 3 of 3

Thread: Re: vmnet errors

  1. Re: vmnet errors

    Bit Twister wrote:

    > On Sat, 8 Sep 2007 10:48:12 -0400, Joe LaVigne wrote:
    > >
    > > You are missing the point. 17x.1x.x.x is on the same machine.

    >
    > No I am not missing the point.


    On the contrary. You apparently don't know what the point even is.

    >
    > > You are not discussing several machines. He said he was running
    > > VMWare. You are misunderstanding how VMWare works.

    >
    > I thought I had a pretty good idea on the general operation of VMware.
    > It has a linux operating system which allows you to run vitural
    > machines under it's control.


    VMWare is nothing of the sort. It's an application running atop some
    other operating system that provides an environment in which guest
    operating systems and their own supported software may run.

    > > When you install VMWare server, 2 additional network adapters are
    > > installed. VMNET0 and VMNET1. They are for local machine use.
    > > They reside on the same machine, and use addresses in local subnets
    > > not currently present on the LAN.

    >
    > I can agree pretty much with that. Let's look at this


    Your diagrams were completely FUBAR. Virtual vmnet interfaces aren't
    "sub-interfaces" bridged with some off the wall third interface.

    > Yep, until we received information about only one machine behind one


    That information was given in the very first post. You simply don't
    know enough about networking and/or VMWare to grasp the problem, let
    alone be of any use.

    To the OP, it's obvious cupsd is sending multicast packets, and your
    VMware interfaces are configured for multicast. This is normal network
    traffic. If it bothers you disable the firewall rule that rejects the
    packets (or specifically allow them), make cupsd quit multicasting, or
    reconfigure your vmnet interfaces accordingly. The latter may break
    some things for your virtual machines and option #2 may make it
    difficult to configure your printer as a shared device if you ever want
    to.

    > We see how paranoid Hadron is about providing any network information.


    Internal network topography is one of the first things crackers map.
    Since it wasn't necessary to know the specific IP addresses to sort
    this problem out (if you have a clue) there's no reason to hand over
    even this small crumb of information.

    > We cannot be sure about any information/facts he provides as long as
    > he continues to decide what information we do not need to troubleshoot
    > his problem.


    I'm sure it makes you feel better to put "we" in the same category as
    "you", but unfortunately for your bruised ego some of us have already
    solved the problem that's still befuddling you.


  2. Re: vmnet errors

    On Sat, 8 Sep 2007 23:21:14 +0200 (CEST), Anonymous wrote:
    >> Bit Twister wrote

    >
    > Your diagrams were completely FUBAR. Virtual vmnet interfaces aren't
    > "sub-interfaces" bridged with some off the wall third interface.


    Sorry you read something into the diagram which is not there.
    I was showing 1 Host and 2 Guest machines with their ip address.

    >> Yep, until we received information about only one machine behind one

    >
    > That information was given in the very first post.


    Well, I beg to differ there. Navigating back through the thread this
    is what was posted

    --- start of post ----------
    I just happened to check out my /var/log/messages and find this

    Sep 7 14:00:08 localhost kernel: [20264.187749] Unknown OutputIN=
    OUT=vmnet8 SRC=17*.1*.7*.* DST=17*.1*.7*.25* LEN=172 TOS=0x00 PREC=0x00
    TTL=64 ID=0 DF PROTO=UDP SPT=631 DPT=631 LEN=152

    and similar being logged every few seconds. (I changed the ip
    addresses).

    Any ideas?
    --- end post ----------

    Consider this setup

    ,--------------------.
    Internet<--->| WAN 71.252.137.238 | .-PC3---------.
    | LAN 192.168.1.1 | | XP Home |
    `--------+-----------' | 172.14.7.10 |
    | `--+----------'
    | |
    |eth0 |eth1
    .-PC1------------+-----------------------+----------.
    | 192.168.1.30 172.14.7.2 |
    | VMWare VMWare |
    | 172.16.12.2 172.18.7.2 |
    | | | |
    | +-------------------. | |
    | |eth0 | eth2 |eth1 |
    | .------------+------. .-------+-----------. |
    | | 172.16.12.128 | | 172.16.12.129 | |
    | | guest1 | | guest2 | |
    | | | | 172.18.7.22 | |
    | `-------------------' `-------------------' |
    `---------------------------------------------------'

    Guest2 is configured to be a router.

    > You simply don't know enough about networking and/or VMWare to grasp
    > the problem, let alone be of any use.


    So in the above setup, you're telling me PC3 could not be causing
    entries in Guest2's log based on the original post.

    You cannot prove to me that the original post indicates only a one
    guest in the only host in the LAN.

    All I was trying to show was;
    providing actual numbers instead of
    SRC=17*.1*.7*.* DST=17*.1*.7*.25*
    would allow anyone to point to which machine/ip to make whatever
    configuration change desired. Machine meaning either guest or host in
    all my posts.

    In the above setup, you would have no idea which /var/log/messages the
    log snippet was pulled from.

    > To the OP, it's obvious cupsd is sending multicast packets,


    Without the OP indicating which OS is running the process, you are
    just guessing.

    I can agree that there is a damn fine chance of you being correct. :-D
    Had you followed the thread, you would see I was guessing cupsd is the
    offender.

    > Internal network topography is one of the first things crackers map.
    > Since it wasn't necessary to know the specific IP addresses to sort
    > this problem out (if you have a clue) there's no reason to hand over
    > even this small crumb of information.


    And if the setup is like the example, all you can say is some process
    on SRC=17*.1*.7*.* is sending the packets.

    You cannot tell the OP to look on 172.14.7.10 to see what is doing the
    dirty deed, if SRC=172.14.7.10


  3. Re: vmnet errors

    Bit Twister wrote:

    > > Your diagrams were completely FUBAR. Virtual vmnet interfaces aren't
    > > "sub-interfaces" bridged with some off the wall third interface.

    >
    > Sorry you read something into the diagram which is not there.
    > I was showing 1 Host and 2 Guest machines with their ip address.


    That may be what you tried to show, or thought you showed, but you did
    not. You pasted in some sort of bizarre RFC 1918 interface that can
    never exist.

    > >> Yep, until we received information about only one machine behind
    > >> one

    > >
    > > That information was given in the very first post.

    >
    > Well, I beg to differ there. Navigating back through the thread this
    > is what was posted


    Everyone saw what was posted. It was more than enough information to
    diagnose the problem and suggest several solutions, *if* you possess a
    clue regarding VMWare. You obvioulsy do not, as your continued
    confusion and still completely FUBAR diagrams so clearly demonstrate.

    > > To the OP, it's obvious cupsd is sending multicast packets,

    >
    > Without the OP indicating which OS is running the process, you are
    > just guessing.


    Are you really so daft that you don't know what group you're reading?

    That explains how you could be so confused about VMWare and basic
    networking anyway.


+ Reply to Thread