Recent content by aasami

The same occurs with AlmaLinux 9.2. I have upgraded one of cluster nodes to PVE8 and migrated this LXC to it without any issues. But when I run again pve7to8 on this upgraded node it still reports that: WARN: Found at least one CT (30188) which does not support running in a unified cgroup v2...

Thank you @monk! Your workaround with dmsetup remove works perfectly. I home Proxmox devs will fix this annoyance one day.

Thank's for the tip. Now I've tried layer3+4 hash policy, but the result is unchanged.

I don't think that it's 50/50 chance to use the same link. When one link is fully saturated, it should use another one. Otherwise it wouldn't have any sense to use bond (802.3ad), when there is no gain in performance.

Using 8 parallel streams gives the same speed unfortunately: [ ID] Interval Transfer Bitrate Retr Cwnd [ 5] 0.00-1.00 sec 239 MBytes 2.01 Gbits/sec 0 721 KBytes [ 7] 0.00-1.00 sec 248 MBytes 2.08 Gbits/sec 0 721 KBytes [ 9]...

Hi! I have some troubles setting up bond on BCM57504 via S5224F-ON. Network configuration: auto lo iface lo inet loopback auto enp129s0f0np0 iface enp129s0f0np0 inet manual auto enp129s0f1np1 iface enp129s0f1np1 inet manual auto enp129s0f2np2 iface enp129s0f2np2 inet manual auto...

It's just a wild guess, but I think the type is determined from the name. I would try to rename vmbr0.5 to vmbr5 in /etc/network/interfaces and reload with ifreload -a

Thanks.

Hi, I have a 13-node PVE custer connected via FC to storage. I'm going to add another 4 PVE nodes as Ceph cluster storage. I would like to know whether it is better to have separate 4 node Cluster with Ceph connected to the existing cluster as separate storage, or should I add those 4 nodes with...

You nailed it! This helps a LOT indeed! Thank you Stoiko.You're the man!

Yes, I checked it from PMG. Here is the output: [pmg ~]# drill mx nlcsk.org ;; ->>HEADER<<- opcode: QUERY, rcode: NOERROR, id: 46346 ;; flags: qr rd ra ; QUERY: 1, ANSWER: 1, AUTHORITY: 0, ADDITIONAL: 0 ;; QUESTION SECTION: ;; nlcsk.org. IN MX ;; ANSWER SECTION: nlcsk.org. 917...

There is only A record for "mail.exmample.com" no AAAA record found. This sholudn't be a problem normally. Most domains we communicate with doesn't have AAAA records and delivery works to those.

Here is error report, when it doesn't work: Nov 4 09:58:08 pmg postfix/smtp[2812391]: B90D347EA8: to=<user@example.com>, relay=none, delay=0.01, delays=0.01/0/0/0, dsn=5.4.4, status=bounced (Host or domain name not found. Name service error for name=example.com type=AAAA: Host found but no...

Hi I've experienced this issue many times in the past, and it starts to be annoying. It looks like this is still not fixed in current version of PMG. Is this such low priority because nobody cares or the solution is somewhat complex? The bug report hasn't been updated for three years now.

When noone replied, I have posted a ticket to the customer portal and here is the solution: Enable invalid packets with nf_conntrack_allow_invalid on all cluster nodes in /etc/pve/nodes/$NODE_NAME/host.fw: [OPTIONS] nf_conntrack_allow_invalid: 1 Thank you Proxmox for your superb support!