From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: 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) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by lists.proxmox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 0B9A8823BA for ; Sun, 28 Nov 2021 23:55:08 +0100 (CET) Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id E5EC029D41 for ; Sun, 28 Nov 2021 23:54:37 +0100 (CET) Received: from mail-oi1-x230.google.com (mail-oi1-x230.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::230]) (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 D01EE29D2F for ; Sun, 28 Nov 2021 23:54:36 +0100 (CET) Received: by mail-oi1-x230.google.com with SMTP id bj13so31014416oib.4 for ; Sun, 28 Nov 2021 14:54:36 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=wolfspyre-com.20210112.gappssmtp.com; s=20210112; h=mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date:cc :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to; bh=3QvDcrI8uWVmo7sxJ8gKT5N24d/aj9rdVlOwRRIXsb0=; b=R1Ept/ygM1uwvdl5QDW7TZr+ruDQeK0VKJFq5e6opLytAxM7ha1IQzZgW8zvYre5bQ cq56R5OjI0/Jk0xLM9lTDbZj7s0LBM5hPyPeX9NFRmWaA3FYHGJ6H1+O1B5LGAU7bIah 5Sp1I83La9VqKMnWx/IvzgVThAB9gPISInjGkW6ySdpPgTbfkUZ/BLyi8SE4CC2bu+0N VPyQQgA234zQYLJH8Tb0FlgRyVG+NhendjOnR0W5iW40tSfNBnaAg+SEkJzqUuhpR+hb oIKHtyA7B1wspa4IDeANMkgaUTOFGeR/ei46pfw2h3vqKDbZlM6/2TIdz4E2tpUiqupi u/Ow== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date:cc :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to; bh=3QvDcrI8uWVmo7sxJ8gKT5N24d/aj9rdVlOwRRIXsb0=; b=eqJUFtFgLy4iEn4XgF/bSxvCWD1gZJbuYjG/zN1iC+KDv4Odtr2g2JHa7G+U0bi2IK 3PoZNw+XiFm2l9EiU+baK+Qz7bif8FUyI1o9rDFt1vNNIET95k8ouGca/iAzWRgmDd2+ 6vb0A0k13xjUa59vL8AtlF8/YmiKflkXmZqwsWHTaTFuqv6M/tTBffc3M37xjDC0BBzE Y9RJ0QNUYo1kOA4vvycfYr72hQuE0YSM1+TOR6CYS3p72VGTEFzPwr7eqJZUEuDIoByK MPEcjFxfnmIGXF87+pu/sk8OI4g3251YJrEBkNh7fmDlOoFqvAwhok5Gzkcblvme/6/p mJQQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM533CvnywTM6OZxkzg2yee3opQQxK67JzJpqUhvfG6DJMExJGiHQ9 gwTauDLWZGJXIshq2USkSN2hrQ== X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJzG/war6OR/TS/+5J42iUOeHu4MTV3L9h1VJiPvQ2Yof2FLHd55rPJTOiYfbbmGMW1thHjjbA== X-Received: by 2002:aca:d0d:: with SMTP id 13mr35938629oin.107.1638140069292; Sun, 28 Nov 2021 14:54:29 -0800 (PST) Received: from smtpclient.apple (108-221-46-27.lightspeed.austtx.sbcglobal.net. [108.221.46.27]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id 49sm2323973oti.65.2021.11.28.14.54.28 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-ECDSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Sun, 28 Nov 2021 14:54:28 -0800 (PST) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 15.0 \(3693.40.0.1.62\)) From: Wolf Noble In-Reply-To: <47BB1F6A-23C7-40EB-B046-A78F6D2FBB62@benappy.com> Date: Sun, 28 Nov 2021 16:54:28 -0600 Cc: PVE User List Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: <9961E5E0-A8EF-4B04-AC3A-017C42723916@wolfspyre.com> References: <47BB1F6A-23C7-40EB-B046-A78F6D2FBB62@benappy.com> To: Proxmox VE user list X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3693.40.0.1.62) X-SPAM-LEVEL: Spam detection results: 0 BAYES_00 -1.9 Bayes spam probability is 0 to 1% 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 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] ARP issue X-BeenThere: pve-user@lists.proxmox.com X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Proxmox VE user list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 28 Nov 2021 22:55:08 -0000 Hiya, IC! it's not obvious (to me) what problem you're trying to address.=20 Generally, ip addresses aught be unique... having the same address on = multiple hosts *IS POSSIBLE* but is (usually) a ReallyBadIdea(tm)=20 I want to make sure I understand what you're trying to accomplish before = just taking my (mis)understanding and running with it ;)=20 Wolf Noble Hoof & Paw wolf@wolfspyre.com [=3D The contents of this message have been written, read, processed, = erased, sorted, sniffed, compressed, rewritten, misspelled, = overcompensated, lost, found, and most importantly delivered entirely = with recycled electrons =3D] On Nov 23, 2021, at 1:58 PM, ic wrote: Hi, I=E2=80=99m running PVE 7.0 on a bunch of servers. I noticed something = strange. There is a vmbr2 containing one physical interface (ens19) with an IP = (10.X.Y.Z/24). There is a vmbr1 containing NO physical interface with another IP = (10.A.B.C/24) (outside of the range of vmbr2, even if this is irrelevant = for this problem). Somehow, the other physical servers connected to ens19 get an ARP reply = with the mac address of ens19 for the IP on vmbr1 (which, again, has no = physical interface). In an =E2=80=9Cip a=E2=80=9D output, this mac address appears only in = ens19 and vmbr2. vmbr1 has its own mac (different from the physical mac = of ens19/vmbr2). What am I missing? In my setup I need vmbr2 to have the same IP on each physical host and = not leak on the outside network so this is pretty annoying :( BR, ic _______________________________________________ pve-user mailing list pve-user@lists.proxmox.com https://lists.proxmox.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pve-user