proxmox only detects one of the two network interfaces

D

debruijnsteven

New Member
Sep 22, 2023
13
3
3
Hello all,

I need a little help to get everything up and running here..
Recently I had to buy new hardware for our proxmox setup, due to the stability issues with the newest intel processors.
In the old setup, my mobo had two network interfaces, which i used both to seperate frigate network traffic from the rest.

No in the new setup, i have the Asus ROG crosshair X870E hero motherboard, with the Ryzen 9 7950x on it.
This board also has two interfaces, but proxmox only detects one of them.

With the old setup, proxmox automatically detected both ports so all i had to do is create a second bridge and everything worked perfectly.
But with the new setup, proxmox only detects one of them...

Right now, everything runs on this single interface, but i want to use both.

lspci | grep 'Ethernet':
Code: 
root@pve:~# lspci | grep 'Ethernet'
0d:00.0 Ethernet controller: Intel Corporation Ethernet Controller I226-V (rev 06)
0e:00.0 Ethernet controller: Realtek Semiconductor Co., Ltd. Device 8126 (rev 01)

ip a:
Code: 
root@pve:~# ip a
1: lo: <LOOPBACK,UP,LOWER_UP> mtu 65536 qdisc noqueue state UNKNOWN group default qlen 1000
    link/loopback 00:00:00:00:00:00 brd 00:00:00:00:00:00
    inet 127.0.0.1/8 scope host lo
       valid_lft forever preferred_lft forever
    inet6 ::1/128 scope host noprefixroute
       valid_lft forever preferred_lft forever
2: eno1: <BROADCAST,MULTICAST,UP,LOWER_UP> mtu 1500 qdisc mq master vmbr0 state UP group default qlen 1000
    link/ether 60:cf:84:80:9a:ce brd ff:ff:ff:ff:ff:ff
    altname enp13s0
3: vmbr0: <BROADCAST,MULTICAST,UP,LOWER_UP> mtu 1500 qdisc noqueue state UP group default qlen 1000
    link/ether 60:cf:84:80:9a:ce brd ff:ff:ff:ff:ff:ff
    inet 192.168.1.220/24 scope global vmbr0
       valid_lft forever preferred_lft forever
    inet6 fe80::62cf:84ff:fe80:9ace/64 scope link
       valid_lft forever preferred_lft forever
4: vmbr1: <BROADCAST,MULTICAST,UP,LOWER_UP> mtu 1500 qdisc noqueue state UNKNOWN group default qlen 1000
    link/ether 82:36:83:fc:6f:87 brd ff:ff:ff:ff:ff:ff
    inet 192.168.1.197/24 scope global vmbr1
       valid_lft forever preferred_lft forever
    inet6 fe80::8036:83ff:fefc:6f87/64 scope link
       valid_lft forever preferred_lft forever
vmbr1 is the second bridge, which i intended for frigate.

ive added eno2 manually to /etc/network/interfaces. without succes unfortunately.
Code: 
auto lo
iface lo inet loopback

iface eno1 inet manual

iface eno2 inet manual

auto vmbr0
iface vmbr0 inet static
        address 192.168.1.220/24
        gateway 192.168.1.1
        bridge-ports eno1
        bridge-stp off
        bridge-fd 0

auto vmbr1
iface vmbr1 inet static
        address 192.168.1.197/24
        bridge-ports eno2
        bridge-stp off
        bridge-fd 0

source /etc/network/interfaces.d/*

Can anyone point me in the right direction? how do i get the second port up and running?

Thanks in advance!
 
Last edited:
Check your knowledge about ipv4 network setup.

A Linux bridge interface (commonly called vmbrX) is needed to connect gueststo the underlying physical network. It can be thought of as a virtual switchwhich the guests and physical interfaces are connected to. This section providessome examples on how the network can be set up to accommodate different use caseslike redundancy with a bond,vlans orrouted andNAT setups.

see:
dmesg | grep -e "eth" -e "eno" -e "enp"

use only one Proxmox VE ipv4 IP for the system access and only one default gateway.
Your dhcpd on you local net will give you over eno1/ vmbr0 other ips for you VM oder LXC.

If you find all the names of your Ethernet devices, you can setup LACP - Link Aggregation - on 2 ethernet devices.
And don't forget to setup your manged switch right.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: debruijnsteven
news said:
Check your knowledge about ipv4 network setup.

A Linux bridge interface (commonly called vmbrX) is needed to connect gueststo the underlying physical network. It can be thought of as a virtual switchwhich the guests and physical interfaces are connected to. This section providessome examples on how the network can be set up to accommodate different use caseslike redundancy with a bond,vlans orrouted andNAT setups.

see:
dmesg | grep -e "eth" -e "eno" -e "enp"

use only one Proxmox VE ipv4 IP for the system access and only one default gateway.
Your dhcpd on you local net will give you over eno1/ vmbr0 other ips for you VM oder LXC.

If you find all the names of your Ethernet devices, you can setup LACP - Link Aggregation - on 2 ethernet devices.
And don't forget to setup your manged switch right.
Click to expand...
First of all, thanks for your response!

I do want to use two seperate network ports because of the high bandwidth for the frigate lxc. It uses around 100mbps continiously. That why i had the frigate lxc on a different bridge, and that bridge bond to an differen ethernet device.

I've written down how i configured that last time; so that is no issue.
But the problem here is dat proxmox doesn't detect the second port. Perhaps something hardware related or driver related. But i don't know where to start to solve that.
 
Please show the output of that command.

Don't use 2 Ethernet interface on real hardware on the same ipv4 network segment: 192.168.1.0/24.
 
  • Like
Reactions: UdoB
news said:
Please show the output of that command.

Don't use 2 Ethernet interface on real hardware on the same ipv4 network segment: 192.168.1.0/24.
Click to expand...
Here is the output:
Code: 
root@pve:~# dmesg | grep -e "eth" -e "eno" -e "enp"
[    1.351438] igc 0000:0d:00.0 eth0: MAC: 60:cf:84:80:9a:ce
[    5.657331] igc 0000:0d:00.0 eno1: renamed from eth0
[   17.742147] vmbr0: port 1(eno1) entered blocking state
[   17.742151] vmbr0: port 1(eno1) entered disabled state
[   17.742157] igc 0000:0d:00.0 eno1: entered allmulticast mode
[   17.742189] igc 0000:0d:00.0 eno1: entered promiscuous mode
[   20.527852] igc 0000:0d:00.0 eno1: NIC Link is Up 1000 Mbps Full Duplex, Flow Control: RX/TX
[   20.634677] vmbr0: port 1(eno1) entered blocking state
[   20.634682] vmbr0: port 1(eno1) entered forwarding state
[   68.479650] vmbr0: port 2(veth100i0) entered blocking state
[   68.479654] vmbr0: port 2(veth100i0) entered disabled state
[   68.479669] veth100i0: entered allmulticast mode
[   68.479704] veth100i0: entered promiscuous mode
[   68.518635] eth0: renamed from vethmDZqOd
[   68.849327] vmbr0: port 2(veth100i0) entered blocking state
[   68.849331] vmbr0: port 2(veth100i0) entered forwarding state
[  143.734264] fwbr102i0: port 2(veth102i0) entered blocking state
[  143.734267] fwbr102i0: port 2(veth102i0) entered disabled state
[  143.734273] veth102i0: entered allmulticast mode
[  143.734303] veth102i0: entered promiscuous mode
[  143.771159] eth0: renamed from vethXJX3Ky
[  144.139845] fwbr102i0: port 2(veth102i0) entered blocking state
[  144.139849] fwbr102i0: port 2(veth102i0) entered forwarding state
[  187.794552] fwbr104i0: port 2(veth104i0) entered blocking state
[  187.794555] fwbr104i0: port 2(veth104i0) entered disabled state
[  187.794559] veth104i0: entered allmulticast mode
[  187.794587] veth104i0: entered promiscuous mode
[  187.830677] eth0: renamed from vethkdvgJs
[  188.248605] fwbr104i0: port 2(veth104i0) entered blocking state
[  188.248610] fwbr104i0: port 2(veth104i0) entered forwarding state
[  188.253342] audit: type=1400 audit(1736758446.960:34): apparmor="STATUS" operation="profile_load" label="lxc-104_</var/lib/lxc>//&:lxc-104_<-var-lib-lxc>:unconfined" name="ubuntu_pro_esm_cache//apt_methods" pid=6267 comm="apparmor_parser"
[  188.253344] audit: type=1400 audit(1736758446.960:35): apparmor="STATUS" operation="profile_load" label="lxc-104_</var/lib/lxc>//&:lxc-104_<-var-lib-lxc>:unconfined" name="ubuntu_pro_esm_cache//apt_methods_gpgv" pid=6267 comm="apparmor_parser"
[  240.019048] fwbr111i0: port 2(veth111i0) entered blocking state
[  240.019050] fwbr111i0: port 2(veth111i0) entered disabled state
[  240.019056] veth111i0: entered allmulticast mode
[  240.019085] veth111i0: entered promiscuous mode
[  240.056798] eth0: renamed from vethE7BUrg
[  240.656525] fwbr111i0: port 2(veth111i0) entered blocking state
[  240.656529] fwbr111i0: port 2(veth111i0) entered forwarding state
[  244.048824] br-98dd1186f664: port 1(veth7ebe626) entered blocking state
[  244.048826] br-98dd1186f664: port 1(veth7ebe626) entered disabled state
[  244.048835] veth7ebe626: entered allmulticast mode
[  244.048874] veth7ebe626: entered promiscuous mode
[  244.053712] br-98dd1186f664: port 2(veth04076f3) entered blocking state
[  244.053714] br-98dd1186f664: port 2(veth04076f3) entered disabled state
[  244.053723] veth04076f3: entered allmulticast mode
[  244.053768] veth04076f3: entered promiscuous mode
[  244.423465] eth0: renamed from vethde45401
[  244.434992] br-98dd1186f664: port 2(veth04076f3) entered blocking state
[  244.434995] br-98dd1186f664: port 2(veth04076f3) entered forwarding state
[  244.442381] eth0: renamed from veth2f9edcf
[  244.453005] br-98dd1186f664: port 1(veth7ebe626) entered blocking state
[  244.453008] br-98dd1186f664: port 1(veth7ebe626) entered forwarding state
[  289.431843] vmbr0: port 9(veth113i0) entered blocking state
[  289.431847] vmbr0: port 9(veth113i0) entered disabled state
[  289.431868] veth113i0: entered allmulticast mode
[  289.431910] veth113i0: entered promiscuous mode
[  289.458698] eth0: renamed from vethf7qICv
[  291.840946] vmbr0: port 9(veth113i0) entered blocking state
[  291.840951] vmbr0: port 9(veth113i0) entered forwarding state


I'm a bit suprised + curious why i i shouldn't use two ethernet interfaces in the same network.
I mean; the second interface is completely dedicated for the frigate lxc, has its own ip and the managed switch only allows traffic with the camera's on that port.
Also it worked perfectly for a few months on the previous hardware.

Absolutely not doubting your knowledge; in fact: my knowledge is based on nothing more than a year of two trial and error with proxmox, and a lot of googling.
But can you explain why i should not do this? and just leave all the traffic on a single port?

Thanks again!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom