Xen 
 
Home About Xen.org Xen Xen Summit Wiki Mailing List Bug Tracker Xen Downloads
 
   
 

xen-users

Re: [Xen-users] network-route and vif-route setup help

To: "Mooktakim Ahmed" <mma@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [Xen-users] network-route and vif-route setup help
From: "Molle Bestefich" <molle.bestefich@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Thu, 30 Mar 2006 19:55:54 +0200
Cc: xen-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Delivery-date: Thu, 30 Mar 2006 17:57:45 +0000
Domainkey-signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=beta; d=gmail.com; h=received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; b=Dnc5KXZE/mPuhtTm+3jCn/gcfIW/c4oDxxW3+dIGuSeinIkZ3s8J0mf3iE4jirk+qViZaRBCayOfsMp9AKbJ8hhIypCl43vWdHdG3c0wC+vnSfbhpI/9D6fQdD7C+gZ2FzsCbt/x2emJP9x0FZBqZNK1c3GbUh4IR2Z+gyA8MC8=
Envelope-to: www-data@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <3674980.post@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
List-help: <mailto:xen-users-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=help>
List-id: Xen user discussion <xen-users.lists.xensource.com>
List-post: <mailto:xen-users@lists.xensource.com>
List-subscribe: <http://lists.xensource.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/xen-users>, <mailto:xen-users-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=subscribe>
List-unsubscribe: <http://lists.xensource.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/xen-users>, <mailto:xen-users-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=unsubscribe>
References: <44848.80.176.88.99.1143157108.squirrel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <Pine.LNX.4.63.0603232051200.3409@localhost> <57094.80.176.88.99.1143581082.squirrel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <41371.80.176.88.99.1143584006.squirrel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <54628.80.176.88.99.1143591905.squirrel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <442A56B9.7070507@xxxxxxxxxxxx> <37848.80.176.88.99.1143655610.squirrel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <3674980.post@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sender: xen-users-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Mooktakim Ahmed wrote:
> No one has any idea how to solve this?

Change the subnet mask ;-).

Seriously, 255.255.255.255 sounds odd.
The smallest usable subnet is 255.255.255.252.  Seeing as the lower IP
address in the subnet designates the network itself, and the highest
IP in the subnet is per definition the broadcast address,
255.255.255.254 doesn't seem usable, and 255.255.255.255 certainly
doesn't.

I'm not an expert, so take it with a grain of salt.  I don't know what
your kernel does with it's routing tables etc. when you choose
255.255.255.255, and I don't know if perhaps you're right and you've
got the correct subnet mask.  But it definitely sounds very odd.

_______________________________________________
Xen-users mailing list
Xen-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-users