Greg Rivers wrote on 2019/05/30 18:37: [...] >> Do I have something weird in my setup causing this? I don't recall ever >> having this issue when not using failover lagg. Running recent 13-CURRENT. >> > I think there's a (unknown?) problem that makes lagg(4) incompatible with > bridge(4). I've never been unable to make a lagg interface work as a member of > a bridge. Lacking the time to pursue it, I've resorted to NATing instead. lagg and bridge can work together. I am running machine with FreeBSD 11.2 with 2 Intel NICs: em0 and em1 combined in to lagg0 lagg0 has 4 static IP addresses There is also bhyve VM on tap20, this VM has another 2 static IP addresses tap20 and lagg0 are members of the bridge. This bridge is renamed to "vm-public" vm-public: flags=8843<UP,BROADCAST,RUNNING,SIMPLEX,MULTICAST> metric 0 mtu 1500 ether da:ae:ba:75:53:ce nd6 options=1<PERFORMNUD> groups: bridge vm-switch viid-4c918_at_ id 00:00:00:00:00:00 priority 32768 hellotime 2 fwddelay 15 maxage 20 holdcnt 6 proto rstp maxaddr 2000 timeout 1200 root id 00:00:00:00:00:00 priority 32768 ifcost 0 port 0 member: tap20 flags=143<LEARNING,DISCOVER,AUTOEDGE,AUTOPTP> ifmaxaddr 0 port 5 priority 128 path cost 2000000 member: lagg0 flags=143<LEARNING,DISCOVER,AUTOEDGE,AUTOPTP> ifmaxaddr 0 port 4 priority 128 path cost 2000000 Everything works without any problem. The only problem in the beginning was PF rules. I added rule to allow traffic to the VM IP addresses. Miroslav LachmanReceived on Thu May 30 2019 - 18:25:29 UTC
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Wed May 19 2021 - 11:41:20 UTC