Search results

Other steps you can try: is the correct interface in your vmbr0 try arp -ne and arping 192.168.0.1 -i vmbr0 and why did you curl localhost and not something else on the network/internet?

Hi, it's probably your subnet mask. I would guess, that it should be /24 or something :)

Hi, there are two solutions: 1.) split the VLANs on the interface: eno1.50 and eno1.60 and for example use eno1.50 in vmbr0 and eno1.60 in vmbr1 2.) split the VLANs with a VLAN-aware bridge personally I would recommend (1). Therefore you have to create two "Linux VLAN"s in the Web-UI...

Hi, you could also try ethtool vmbr0 on both servers. I also found out, that Linux bridges are speed capped by their slowest bridge port. Maybe you have some slow ports in your bridge?

Hi, can you please post the output of pveversion -v and the contents of /etc/pve/qemu-server/<vmid>.conf

iptables -F -t nat should do it. And don't forget to remove the post-up/-down statements from your network config ;)

I think, I understand what your goal is now :) But wouldn't it be easier to let your router forward port 80 directly to 8091 on 192.168.1.254? In this case, the PVE would only act as a switch via vmbr0 and wouldn't have to bother with iptables port forwarding.

Hi, what do you mean by "yum update"? The PVE is debian based and therefore uses apt and not yum like CentOS/... Also, please post the outputs of ip address and ip route from your host/VMs. The config of dhcpd might also be interesting.

Hi, have you tried with --dport 8091 and --to <...>:80? But I'm not sure, because you did not provide too much information on your setup and goal with the DNAT. Perhaps a bit more context could help :)

Hallo, grundsätzlich hast du recht: Du kannst "Mast" nicht joinen solange Server 2 noch VMs oder LXCs hat. Das hat einen einfachen Grund: Was soll der Cluster machen, wenn auf Server 2 eine VM 100 existiert, aber im Cluster bereits eine VM 100 vorhanden ist? Da die VM-ID eindeutig sein muss...

Hi, can you please provide the output of ip a and ip r for the PVE host and your client (alternatively ipconfig /all if you are on Windows)

Perhaps it is related to the "Firewall" setting on the interfaces is active. Try disabling it on the interfaces

Hi, you are probably looking for a simple bridge. As a bridge (other name for switch) provides a new Layer-2 network between your pfSense and Windows VM. :)

Hi, both PVE and Ceph may not function without a quorum. Ceph does not allow any disk writes from VMs without a quorum – disk reads might work, but I am not sure. For the PVE it is not as severe, the VMs will keep running, but any configuration-related changes may not work, and...

Hallo, ISOs für alle unterstützten Versionen sind hier [0] zu finden – 6.1 ist da leider nicht mehr dabei. Warum ist es für dich wichtig, das Upgrade von 6.1 auf 6.4 zu testen? Solange die Major-Version die selbe ist, kann man bedenkenlos upgraden. [0]...

Hi, Most of these interfaces are likely PVE internal interfaces. For example, vmbr* are your configured bridges, fw* belong to the PVE firewall, and tap<vmid>i<nr> belong to each VM interface respectively. Do not mess with these interfaces, as they are completely managed by the PVE. Because...

Hi, the recommended way is to follow the upgrade guide in our wiki [0] :) [0] https://pve.proxmox.com/wiki/Upgrade_from_6.x_to_7.0

Hi, you could try to add the auto keyword for each interface. Without this, the interfaces won't come up automatically at boot.

Hi, Why not simply one bridge, instead of two? This one bridge could have both interfaces as its bridge_ports

Hi, This has to do with how the Linux kernel names the network interfaces. [0] If you change your PCI configuration, the PCI devices might get new addresses and therefore other names from the kernel. As this is predictable, restoring your original PCI configuration should give you your old...