Bugs on GUI interface setup with Proxmox8

[adamb]

Whats up with all these bugs in the GUI for Proxmox8 and bonding/bridging?






Getting that just trying to remove the bridge.

We expect better than this for proxmox.

This is a fresh 8.1 install from ISO and updated to the non enterprise repo's.

Never had any of these issues with Proxmox3, Proxmox4, Proxmox5, Proxmox6 and Proxmox7.

 

[spirit]

can you share your full /etc/network/interfaces ?

 

[adamb]

Its happening on all nodes, so maybe its not a "bug" per say. Its certainly different than we are used to though.

root@ccsprox1:~# cat /etc/network/interfaces
auto lo
iface lo inet loopback


iface ens5f0 inet manual


auto bond0
iface bond0 inet manual
        slaves eno50 ens5f0
        bond_miimon 100
        bond_mode active-backup
        mtu 9000


auto vmbr0
iface vmbr0 inet static
        address 10.80.16.193/16
        gateway 10.80.1.5
        bridge-ports ens5f0
        bridge-stp off
        bridge-fd 0


auto vmbr1
iface vmbr1 inet static
        address  10.210.45.148/24
        bridge_ports bond0
        bridge_stp off
        bridge_fd 0
        mtu 9000


iface ens3f2 inet manual


iface ens3f3 inet manual


iface ens1f1 inet manual


iface eno50 inet manual


iface ens5f1 inet manual


iface eno1 inet manual


iface eno2 inet manual


iface eno3 inet manual


iface eno4 inet manual


iface ens3f0 inet manual


iface ens1f0 inet manual


iface ens3f1 inet manual


iface eno49 inet manual




source /etc/network/interfaces.d/*

 

[adamb]

Can't even create a new bond, its complaining about a NIC im not even attempting to use in bond1.

 

[spirit]

you can't have ens5f0 in vmbr0 directly,
and at the same time in bond0.

If it's works, it'll be unstable. This is really an unusupported setup.
(did you have edited manually /etc/network/interfaces ?)

 

[adamb]

you can't have ens5f0 in vmbr0 directly,
and at the same time in bond0.

If it's works, it'll be unstable. This is really an unusupported setup.
(did you have edited manually /etc/network/interfaces ?)

Good catch, but its still acting much different than before.

I will have to do more testing, but something seems different. Our hardware department has reported similar issues as well. I will keep digging.