From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43)
	id 1KJ7QE-00083f-1P
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 16 Jul 2008 09:51:58 -0400
Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43)
	id 1KJ7QA-00083R-Un
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 16 Jul 2008 09:51:57 -0400
Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=49398 helo=monty-python.gnu.org)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1KJ7QA-00083M-PK
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 16 Jul 2008 09:51:54 -0400
Received: from an-out-0708.google.com ([209.85.132.240]:22038)
	by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60)
	(envelope-from <anthony@codemonkey.ws>) id 1KJ7QA-0000PK-Eh
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 16 Jul 2008 09:51:54 -0400
Received: by an-out-0708.google.com with SMTP id d18so102756and.130
	for <qemu-devel@nongnu.org>; Wed, 16 Jul 2008 06:51:51 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID: <487DFCDA.2050208@codemonkey.ws>
Date: Wed, 16 Jul 2008 08:51:22 -0500
From: Anthony Liguori <anthony@codemonkey.ws>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] Two taps, same IP?
References: <487D510C.4070106@quinthar.com> <487D5287.1080707@codemonkey.ws>
	<487D58BF.1070805@quinthar.com>
In-Reply-To: <487D58BF.1070805@quinthar.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Reply-To: qemu-devel@nongnu.org
List-Id: qemu-devel.nongnu.org
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.gnu.org/pipermail/qemu-devel>
List-Post: <mailto:qemu-devel@nongnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=subscribe>
To: qemu-devel@nongnu.org

David Barrett wrote:
> Anthony Liguori wrote:
>> David Barrett wrote:
>>> I'm considering a tap-based alternative to the -redir patch I 
>>> proposed earlier, but I'm just not quite getting how it works.  In 
>>> particular, I'm able to access the webserver on one image just fine, 
>>> but not the other: wget fails with "Connecting to 172.20.0.3:80... 
>>> failed: No route to host."
>>>
>>> Can you explain why and set me straight?
>>>
>>> sudo qemu -kernel-kqemu -net nic,vlan=0 -net tap,vlan=0 image0.raw
>>> sudo qemu -kernel-kqemu -net nic,vlan=0 -net tap,vlan=0 image1.raw
>>
>> You need to pass a unique mac address for each guest.  You're 
>> probably getting mac address collisions.
>
> Hm, you're right, they had the same MAC address.  Unfortunately fixing 
> that had no effect.  Now I'm launching with:
>
> sudo qemu -kernel-kqemu -net nic,vlan=0,macaddr=00:00:00:00:00:00 -net 
> tap,vlan=0 image0.raw
>
> sudo qemu -kernel-kqemu -net nic,vlan=0,macaddr=00:00:00:00:00:11 -net 
> tap,vlan=0 image1.raw
>
> I'm still able to wget image0, but so long as it's operational I can't 
> wget image1.  Like before, shutting down image0 enables wget access to 
> image1.
>
> Looking at ipconfig in the both guests show that the MAC address is 
> being picked up correctly, so it must be something else.
>
> Any other ideas?  Thanks!

What's in your qemu-ifup script?

Regards,

Anthony Liguori

> -david
>
>
>