From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: <gilberto.nunes32@gmail.com> Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (firstgate.proxmox.com [212.224.123.68]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by lists.proxmox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 97CDE77936 for <pve-user@lists.proxmox.com>; Wed, 28 Apr 2021 14:52:08 +0200 (CEST) Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 82471EA29 for <pve-user@lists.proxmox.com>; Wed, 28 Apr 2021 14:51:38 +0200 (CEST) Received: from mail-qk1-x735.google.com (mail-qk1-x735.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::735]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 (128/128 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTPS id 9D1F0EA1E for <pve-user@lists.proxmox.com>; Wed, 28 Apr 2021 14:51:37 +0200 (CEST) Received: by mail-qk1-x735.google.com with SMTP id t17so34866330qkg.4 for <pve-user@lists.proxmox.com>; Wed, 28 Apr 2021 05:51:37 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :content-transfer-encoding; bh=bhAG/6lmQnaVTDiTzL1NZjDEKtxTKZRnocWch8XeeVI=; b=bm85JokdJj4rhb9RXprPa6E8zWlMl+ULo+Xh3TyA+2yDucB5/BdsSU3Xa2GJ/yJJ6J zUshgnSWnoGjo/oSZ/1Mf3zkwUFON0267p6LTpzwT+iVER+5D8jip4347d+iG63zSZRN VEKF+EBl4JYyQEXaMiAAgvehMlEwUFpuU3fWRxKU+hr1Gk1ImwXcORg5faZ1Wldq9TDI 4GgEsKVyTlcnLf1XACrX5wH6hn2YwZLpZBhUpZB4rsM+dfJZ8pBJqjX8IgbrPie0stE7 Jk+iofOTuucMKSILAM9QW9hyR0mefe3iHF/mNGfQgXqO9q2K/h76EFD58BGzrSzmKwiN k8bQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:content-transfer-encoding; bh=bhAG/6lmQnaVTDiTzL1NZjDEKtxTKZRnocWch8XeeVI=; b=sGQTrFBR+6aeZDyHhSjwVpIDLOZgW/n2pMCGIh7bV40/qy1O6vFqwNPW6nNZgDnYJW chKDT0Y3V7WTWWPgXx/d0giuYKrD3slihrWlgZIA4/m63TlC3J3FMYjDZM0mkZiOm2lZ +SIgM//IrNgnvYMsrILC0cb2KWoAsVU5MZ9OUeKvkaVbcNelxzxpOquItQIDHlX1SgQJ pSoesVA1graNiFYZl4fftenlvz3V8IFvAJ2KSDzDZRLsF45OGB/Dv0CR05EjjlZiK5D2 hEL4JGKuJqirqG+trZcit3FkNtpO4aKmWN2FmMFSLn8pbnj67gGMA1+VKIrTW5vTqip5 D3yw== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM530koF5y4Wpyj/LdOrFgk3pBo4n8gQGPYNrmOnetXyt0I9428Jtg kWfwZtFqAdbYQ/7RPWnkS4+ZTFLMBO1OSKG1EBLLcorZ X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJxEp8yVfVnf8YC+XTdoTsHaXD/MKUcQCmE4EaqadeaquNz6iEpbG5eMyTLsR+KzJbPX2/id3LigvWvJa2suQjA= X-Received: by 2002:a05:620a:14ba:: with SMTP id x26mr27302473qkj.457.1619614290084; Wed, 28 Apr 2021 05:51:30 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <299675699.4847.1619611819855.JavaMail.zimbra@fws.fr> <47334094.5067.1619613578451.JavaMail.zimbra@fws.fr> In-Reply-To: <47334094.5067.1619613578451.JavaMail.zimbra@fws.fr> From: Gilberto Ferreira <gilberto.nunes32@gmail.com> Date: Wed, 28 Apr 2021 09:50:53 -0300 Message-ID: <CAOKSTBsDkSkDsOGyGrmnLHwNf27j_=ZBPusrvFkJwd=C7oo_qw@mail.gmail.com> To: Proxmox VE user list <pve-user@lists.proxmox.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-SPAM-LEVEL: Spam detection results: 0 AWL 0.096 Adjusted score from AWL reputation of From: address DKIM_SIGNED 0.1 Message has a DKIM or DK signature, not necessarily valid DKIM_VALID -0.1 Message has at least one valid DKIM or DK signature DKIM_VALID_AU -0.1 Message has a valid DKIM or DK signature from author's domain DKIM_VALID_EF -0.1 Message has a valid DKIM or DK signature from envelope-from domain FREEMAIL_ENVFROM_END_DIGIT 0.25 Envelope-from freemail username ends in digit FREEMAIL_FROM 0.001 Sender email is commonly abused enduser mail provider KAM_NUMSUBJECT 0.5 Subject ends in numbers excluding current years RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE -0.0001 Sender listed at https://www.dnswl.org/, no trust SPF_HELO_NONE 0.001 SPF: HELO does not publish an SPF Record SPF_PASS -0.001 SPF: sender matches SPF record Subject: Re: [PVE-User] SDN issues in 6.4 X-BeenThere: pve-user@lists.proxmox.com X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Proxmox VE user list <pve-user.lists.proxmox.com> List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.proxmox.com/cgi-bin/mailman/options/pve-user>, <mailto:pve-user-request@lists.proxmox.com?subject=unsubscribe> List-Archive: <http://lists.proxmox.com/pipermail/pve-user/> List-Post: <mailto:pve-user@lists.proxmox.com> List-Help: <mailto:pve-user-request@lists.proxmox.com?subject=help> List-Subscribe: <https://lists.proxmox.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pve-user>, <mailto:pve-user-request@lists.proxmox.com?subject=subscribe> X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 28 Apr 2021 12:52:08 -0000 Just curious: did you restart the upgraded nodes? --- Gilberto Nunes Ferreira (47) 99676-7530 - Whatsapp / Telegram Em qua., 28 de abr. de 2021 =C3=A0s 09:39, Daniel Berteaud <daniel@firewall-services.com> escreveu: > > ----- Le 28 Avr 21, =C3=A0 14:10, Daniel Berteaud daniel@firewall-service= s.com a =C3=A9crit : > > > Hi. > > > > Just upgraded a small 3 nodes cluster to 6.4 today. This cluster used t= he SDN > > feature with a single VLAN zone, and a few vnets (each one of the vnets= using a > > VLAN tag, and not VLAN-aware themself). > > I see several issues regarding SDN since the upgrade : > > > > > > > > * The biggest issue is that in Datacenter -> SDN I only see a single= node (with > > the status "available"). The other two do not appear anymore. Withou= t paying > > attention, I clicked on the "Apply" button. This wiped the > > /etc/network/interfaces.d/sdn file on the 2 nodes which do not appea= r anymore, > > and reloaded their network stack. Needless to say it was a complete = failure as > > all the VM attached to one of those vnets lost network connectivity.= I've > > manually copied this /etc/network/interfaces.d/sdn file from the onl= y working > > node to the other two for now, but I can't make any change from the = GUI now or > > it'll do the same again > > * In Datacenter -> SDN -> Zones, my single zone didn't appear anymor= e. No Zone > > were displayed at all. But the Vnets correctly showed they were atta= ched to my > > zone. /etc/pve/sdn/zones.cfg correctly had my zone defined here. I t= ried adding > > it again from the GUI, which seemed to work. The only change it made= to > > /etc/pve/sdn/zones.cfg is the new "ipam: pve" option added to the ex= isting zone > > > > > > I just opened https://bugzilla.proxmox.com/show_bug.cgi?id=3D3403 > I checked another single node (no cluster) PVE install, which have the ex= act same issue, so it's not something specific on my setup, but a more gene= ral (and critical) bug > > Cheers, > Daniel > > > -- > [ https://www.firewall-services.com/ ] > Daniel Berteaud > FIREWALL-SERVICES SAS, La s=C3=A9curit=C3=A9 des r=C3=A9seaux > Soci=C3=A9t=C3=A9 de Services en Logiciels Libres > T=C3=A9l : +33.5 56 64 15 32 > Matrix: @dani:fws.fr > [ https://www.firewall-services.com/ | https://www.firewall-services.com = ] > > > _______________________________________________ > pve-user mailing list > pve-user@lists.proxmox.com > https://lists.proxmox.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pve-user