Bug 1600248
| Summary: | [RFE] Host should check if local MTU is bigger than switch's | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Product: | Red Hat Enterprise Virtualization Manager | Reporter: | Siddhant Rao <sirao> |
| Component: | vdsm | Assignee: | Dan Kenigsberg <danken> |
| Status: | CLOSED DEFERRED | QA Contact: | Meni Yakove <myakove> |
| Severity: | medium | Docs Contact: | |
| Priority: | unspecified | ||
| Version: | 4.2.4 | CC: | dholler, germano, lsurette, mburman, michal.skrivanek, mkalinin, mperina, mzamazal, rbarry, srevivo, ycui |
| Target Milestone: | --- | Keywords: | FutureFeature, Reopened |
| Target Release: | --- | Flags: | lsvaty:
testing_plan_complete-
|
| Hardware: | Unspecified | ||
| OS: | Unspecified | ||
| Whiteboard: | sync-to-jira | ||
| Fixed In Version: | Doc Type: | If docs needed, set a value | |
| Doc Text: | Story Points: | --- | |
| Clone Of: | Environment: | ||
| Last Closed: | 2020-07-07 13:49:56 UTC | Type: | Bug |
| Regression: | --- | Mount Type: | --- |
| Documentation: | --- | CRM: | |
| Verified Versions: | Category: | --- | |
| oVirt Team: | Network | RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host: | |
| Cloudforms Team: | --- | Target Upstream Version: | |
| Embargoed: | |||
|
Description
Siddhant Rao
2018-07-11 20:27:19 UTC
I don't think the problem is limited to migration. If the host as MTU that is bigger than that of the switch, we'd see problems in any other role of network. It makes sense to alert users if they set an MTU that is bigger than that of the switch. This can be done with a ping as suggested here, or by trusting the MTU value reported by the switch over LLDP. https://gerrit.ovirt.org/#/q/I0dc1f80d4e4f704d6be6af2cbaeaf1fce6d24343 already did that. *** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 1515877 *** wrong tab! This bug didn't get any attention for a while, we didn't have the capacity to make any progress. If you deeply care about it or want to work on it please assign/target accordingly This bug didn't get any attention for a while, we didn't have the capacity to make any progress. If you deeply care about it or want to work on it please assign/target accordingly Is the user notified in a reasonable way in a short amount of time after starting the migration, which will timeout? Well, we try to scale migrations with postcopy in order to get a sliding window. If it never makes it at all, I'm not sure if we report anything at all. Milan? A qualified answer could be provided from libvirt/QEMU devs, but a little experiment doesn't hurt. I had started a migration and then blocked input packets on the destination. The migration has failed after about 2 minutes with "unable to connect to server at '...:49152': Connection timed out" or after 30 seconds with "Lost connection to destination host" in vdsm.log, depending on whether I blocked the connection before starting the migration or during migration in progress. So I'd say the answer to Dominik's question above is "yes", although Engine just reports migration failure, without further explanation. Does anyone want to formally test it? Otherwise I'd close CURRENTRELEASE... This request is not currently committed to 4.4.z, moving it to 4.5 Please re-open, if this is still required. |