RHEL Engineering is moving the tracking of its product development work on RHEL 6 through RHEL 9 to Red Hat Jira (issues.redhat.com). If you're a Red Hat customer, please continue to file support cases via the Red Hat customer portal. If you're not, please head to the "RHEL project" in Red Hat Jira and file new tickets here. Individual Bugzilla bugs in the statuses "NEW", "ASSIGNED", and "POST" are being migrated throughout September 2023. Bugs of Red Hat partners with an assigned Engineering Partner Manager (EPM) are migrated in late September as per pre-agreed dates. Bugs against components "kernel", "kernel-rt", and "kpatch" are only migrated if still in "NEW" or "ASSIGNED". If you cannot log in to RH Jira, please consult article #7032570. That failing, please send an e-mail to the RH Jira admins at rh-issues@redhat.com to troubleshoot your issue as a user management inquiry. The email creates a ServiceNow ticket with Red Hat. Individual Bugzilla bugs that are migrated will be moved to status "CLOSED", resolution "MIGRATED", and set with "MigratedToJIRA" in "Keywords". The link to the successor Jira issue will be found under "Links", have a little "two-footprint" icon next to it, and direct you to the "RHEL project" in Red Hat Jira (issue links are of type "https://issues.redhat.com/browse/RHEL-XXXX", where "X" is a digit). This same link will be available in a blue banner at the top of the page informing you that that bug has been migrated.
Bug 761591 - xen-netfront: wait with gARP notification until backend moves to Connected status [TestOnly]
Summary: xen-netfront: wait with gARP notification until backend moves to Connected st...
Keywords:
Status: CLOSED CURRENTRELEASE
Alias: None
Product: Red Hat Enterprise Linux 7
Classification: Red Hat
Component: kernel
Version: 7.0
Hardware: All
OS: Linux
medium
medium
Target Milestone: rc
: ---
Assignee: Red Hat Kernel Manager
QA Contact: Virtualization Bugs
URL:
Whiteboard: xen
Depends On: 866735
Blocks: 741684
TreeView+ depends on / blocked
 
Reported: 2011-12-08 16:48 UTC by Laszlo Ersek
Modified: 2014-06-18 05:36 UTC (History)
9 users (show)

Fixed In Version: v3.3-rc1
Doc Type: Bug Fix
Doc Text:
Clone Of: 713585
Environment:
Last Closed: 2014-06-13 11:35:49 UTC
Target Upstream Version:
Embargoed:

Attachments (Terms of Use)

Comment 9 Lingfei Kong 2014-02-14 07:05:10 UTC 
I did migration test on RHEL5.10 with RHEL7.0, it got 7-15 packet lost during the migration.
Also I have try to set the net.ipv4.conf.{all,default,IFACE}.arp_notify sysctl to 1 in the guest and did migration test again but the network still lost about 7-15 packet. 
Is it acceptable with lost 7-15 packet? 

Host: kernel-xen-2.6.18-380.el5
Guest: kernel-3.10.0-86.el7

Here are the details:
1. Start nfs in System A and mount the nfs to System B.
  #mount $SystemA_ip:/var/lib/xen/images /var/lib/xen/images

2. Edit "/etc/xen/xend-config.sxp" on two machines as following:
   (xend-relocation-server yes)
   (xend-relocation-port 8002)
   (xend-relocation-address '')
   (xend-relocation-hosts-allow '')
# service xend restart

3. Do migration operations
System A to System B:
--- 10.66.85.222 ping statistics ---
23 packets transmitted, 16 received, 30% packet loss, time 24355ms
rtt min/avg/max/mdev = 0.552/2.155/18.863/4.389 ms

System B  to System A:
--- 10.66.85.222 ping statistics ---
25 packets transmitted, 15 received, 40% packet loss, time 27388ms
rtt min/avg/max/mdev = 0.000/2.422/10.114/3.199 ms

System A to System B:
--- 10.66.85.222 ping statistics ---
20 packets transmitted, 14 received, 30% packet loss, time 22685ms

System B to  System A:
--- 10.66.85.222 ping statistics ---
26 packets transmitted, 16 received, 38% packet loss, time 27730ms
rtt min/avg/max/mdev = 0.000/4.141/49.098/11.691 ms
Comment 10 Andrew Jones 2014-02-14 08:06:06 UTC 
(In reply to Lingfei Kong from comment #9)
> I did migration test on RHEL5.10 with RHEL7.0, it got 7-15 packet lost
> during the migration.
> Also I have try to set the net.ipv4.conf.{all,default,IFACE}.arp_notify
> sysctl to 1 in the guest and did migration test again but the network still
> lost about 7-15 packet. 
> Is it acceptable with lost 7-15 packet? 

Yeah, that's fine. Thanks.
Comment 11 Lingfei Kong 2014-02-14 08:17:42 UTC 
Because 7-15 packet lost is acceptable, so change status to VERIFIED.
Comment 12 Ludek Smid 2014-06-13 11:35:49 UTC 
This request was resolved in Red Hat Enterprise Linux 7.0.

Contact your manager or support representative in case you have further questions about the request.
Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.