Search results

The network interface you bind the bridge to depends on your hardware/setup. Mine just happens to be two NICs bonded via LACP. Use whatever VLAN is appropriate for your network setup and the particular guest. Same goes for your management interface. The host's network connection serves as a...

This can be done using Open vSwitch. For example, below is my /etc/network/interfaces, which sets up two NICs as a LACP bond (bond0) that serves as a VLAN trunk. A single bridge (vmbr0) and single interface (vlan99) (solely for management of the host) are joined to the bond. All VMs and...

I've been making LXC templates for Proxmox based off of Ubuntu Base. After adding in systemd (some kind of init is needed) and a couple other base packages the template's tarball comes in at ~36 MB. Expanded, this container takes ~155 MB of disk space. Running at idle, only a few MB RAM and...

Bump. Any other thoughts on this?

For network interfaces whose addressing is controlled directly by PVE (i.e., host nodes, containers), there should be an option (enabled by default) for IPv6 privacy extensions. Preferably, this option could be toggled regardless of IPv6 addressing mode (static / SLAAC / DHCP) (on systems using...

Create symlinks to the desired ISO files at templates/iso

If the manufacturer of your SSD is to be believed (I tend to trust Intel and the specs on on enterprise-grade gear in general more) it would seem consumer-grade units have caught up to where enterprise was ~5 years ago. 275 TBW is for the 480 GB model, 140 TBW for the 240 GB model. Over five...

Used Intel enterprise SATA SSDs are currently going for relatively cheap on eBay. ~$100-120 for 2.5" 480GB units, for example. Most of the listings given here have ended, but it should give you some ideas of what to expect...

My guess is a mismatch between the link aggregation protocol/mode used on Proxmox and the switch. Also, assign IP addresses to the interfaces, not the bridge itself. FWIW, here's my setup below. A basic two NIC LAGG plus a single management interface. VMs/CTs are assigned to a VLAN in their...

LACP and other ethernet bonding/aggregation protocols don't work the way you want/expect them to. You will not get more that 10 Gb between the two nodes when initiating the communication from/to the host OS itself. The number of switches/etc. between the two is irrelevant. The number of...

1. It's still communication between two individual nodes, so you're going to be limited to the bandwidth of a single link. LACP determines how to direct traffic over the bond's links using the IP or MAC addresses of the two sides, which of course are the same no matter how many sessions are...

That's not how LACP and most link aggregations/bonds work. Communication between two individual nodes is not split across both links. LACP can be used to expand available bandwidth for many connections between many nodes. For example, if you have many clients hitting up a server. Or to connect...

This is great. Any way to make this the default over noVNC? It's not listed as an option for the Datacenter Console Viewer.

@bofh I don't know why you continue to believe, after being corrected at least twice, that there's a virtualized router (or for that matter any router aside from the typical Internet gateway) anywhere in the mix. Nor am I willing to put one up as it's not necessary or desired. Given your lack of...

Gotta disagree with you. Implementing the redirect on the host itself, outside of Proxmox, is a bad idea. It adds separate steps to the management of the guests should they be migrated, readdressed, or deleted. You must separately reconfigure iptables on the host(s) for each change. Contrary to...

Um, I'm not quite sure what you're trying to explain here. Best I can discern you're going into some convoluted NAT setups. The original post specified that each container is directly accessible. There is no NAT setup on the Proxmox host, either directly or via some kind of router running as a...

The problem with that is changes made directly to the host's iptables config aren't pinned to the container in any way. Should the container be moved to another host or deleted the redirect settings won't automatically be adjusted as needed. Using Proxmox to set up such forwarding (were it...

So I'm guessing this currently isn't possible?

Yeah, but then all of the other containers are reliant on that one being up and properly routing. I'd rather keep each as independent as possible. I was willing to let the Proxmox host fulfill this role as it'd already be performing firewall functions for the containers and theoretically a...

Ah, that's too bad. I was hoping to not have to install iptables into the affected containers to do the redirect, but it shouldn't be too big an issue.