Description of problem: VLAN adapter on physical network using igb driver can not communicate. PPPoE on a vlan interface works, but not normal traffic doesn't (tcpdump does show ARP replies but they don't populate the ARP table). Possibly a MTU problem where the physical interface doesn't allow 1500+4 bytes. Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable): Booting off older kernel (2.6.18-194.*) immediately restores functionality. Broken since 2.6.18-238. How reproducible: Always, either can or can't ping as network is brought up during boot. Steps to Reproduce: /etc/sysconfig/network-scripts/ifcfg-vlan11: /etc/sysconfig/network-scripts/ifcfg-vlan11 VLAN=yes VLAN_NAME_TYPE=VLAN_PLUS_VID_NO_PAD PHYSDEV=eth1 MACADDR=00:1E:67:28:00:11 DEVICE=vlan11 BOOTPROTO=static IPADDR=10.0.0.1 NETMASK=255.255.255.0 ONBOOT=yes NB: We manually specify the MAC of the vlan interface (using the first 3 octets of the physical card, incremental number, vlan number) as PPPoE at Telco has to originate each connection from a unique MAC.
Hashing out the MACADDR line provides a working VLAN on 2.6.18-238+. We need each VLAN interface to have a unique MAC address though as we establish multiple PPPoE sessions and additionally interface with different networks on layer 3 switches.
please try kernel-2.6.18-279.el5.sassmann_bug723765_01 from http://people.redhat.com/sassmann/kernel/
This kernel works perfectly, many thanks! Will this be committed back in to the main kernel?
This request was evaluated by Red Hat Product Management for inclusion in a Red Hat Enterprise Linux maintenance release. Product Management has requested further review of this request by Red Hat Engineering, for potential inclusion in a Red Hat Enterprise Linux Update release for currently deployed products. This request is not yet committed for inclusion in an Update release.
A fix should make it into the next update.
I think this bug is the same with https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=698928, and it have been fixed in kernel-2.6.18-283.el5. git commit e9f56def58b3c85e161d38782bfceb0ac31662ad
Yep, this is definitely a dupe. Already have a patch for it included in 283.el5 and newer: http://people.redhat.com/~jwilson/el5/ *** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 698928 ***