From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.33) id 1BlwFk-000110-2l for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Sat, 17 Jul 2004 16:57:52 -0400 Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.33) id 1BlwFM-00010Z-Nk for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Sat, 17 Jul 2004 16:57:51 -0400 Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1BlwFM-00010W-Kl for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Sat, 17 Jul 2004 16:57:28 -0400 Received: from [216.254.0.202] (helo=mail2.speakeasy.net) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (TLSv1:DES-CBC3-SHA:168) (Exim 4.34) id 1BlwCS-0007KY-0W for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Sat, 17 Jul 2004 16:54:31 -0400 Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] network fails on windows From: "John R. Hogerhuis" In-Reply-To: <200407171621.44768.jseward@acm.org> References: <200407171707.40476.matthias.jung@uni-dortmund.de> <200407171621.44768.jseward@acm.org> Content-Type: text/plain Message-Id: <1090097744.13141.371.camel@aragorn> Mime-Version: 1.0 Date: Sat, 17 Jul 2004 13:55:44 -0700 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Reply-To: jhoger@pobox.com, qemu-devel@nongnu.org List-Id: qemu-devel.nongnu.org List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: jseward@acm.org, qemu-devel@nongnu.org On Sat, 2004-07-17 at 08:21, Julian Seward wrote: > I agree, there is something funny to do with networking with > WinXP/Win2K guests. I use user-mode networking with the > current cvs head. Sometimes XP is able to make a connection > to the outside world; yet if I just leave the guest machine > idle and try an hour later then it can't; try again 5 minutes > later and it's OK again. It's very frustrating. I have no idea > what's happening. Also, even when it can communicate with > other machines on my local network, it's really slow. > > Wierd thing is, running Red Hat 7.3 as a guest, with user-mode > networking, the guest's connections to the outside world are > both reliable and fast. Which corresponds with Matthias' observation. > > Any ideas? Has anyone else got any related observations? > If someone could post detailed tcpdump output somwehere the problem will likely be apparent in the trace. When it comes to networking the trace tells the story the best... It would be good to have the TCP packets, ARP, DHCP, and any ICMP packets in the trace. Try to filter out any noise from machines not involved. Anyway if someone posts it I'll take a look. -- John.