From owner-freebsd-emulation@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Jun 5 17:05:05 2012 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-emulation@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 430571065686 for ; Tue, 5 Jun 2012 17:05:05 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from yiz5hwi@gmail.com) Received: from mail-vb0-f54.google.com (mail-vb0-f54.google.com [209.85.212.54]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E02528FC18 for ; Tue, 5 Jun 2012 17:05:04 +0000 (UTC) Received: by vbmv11 with SMTP id v11so4004763vbm.13 for ; Tue, 05 Jun 2012 10:05:04 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :content-type; bh=tQBgXDI1Cl1TXAFHtbnQtLeMr1aJQ1g0JwlfWN/wugI=; b=or8Jp+l3eDY9I5VKmIsbkvkRuAGz6Z2zJKCaCO87ItIU8Zq4qlQL52NDOYjX63jq70 uXR650YD+16CD8EaNIA/e/AUS8SxtdOTpdA3YveQJW/YFlfCrN5npqkWHGsT0OmGgwlA TfOKX5J/biZmsvk/jW12UwZJP7s0mXnjXZzODFuj1Qh30DTwoAe1QNZQTGfMMkNhCzV9 jZ98w6NbzeJZir/EIzh0p7LnVFn93g4u6ZtpRSqaqgC96RsoahHDsyW73JXjhuT8WoBo iafeUQIOpw1hGs0clmQgMyKB/mOnbjk1GOCtRuG2c9LINd8EYwLPGgSNSeybwLMZLdno xY0A== MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.220.230.135 with SMTP id jm7mr17537574vcb.23.1338915904144; Tue, 05 Jun 2012 10:05:04 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.52.30.73 with HTTP; Tue, 5 Jun 2012 10:05:04 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: Date: Tue, 5 Jun 2012 13:05:04 -0400 Message-ID: From: Steve Tuts To: freebsd-emulation@freebsd.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 X-Content-Filtered-By: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.5 Subject: Re: one virtualbox vm disrupts all vms and entire network X-BeenThere: freebsd-emulation@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Development of Emulators of other operating systems List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 05 Jun 2012 17:05:05 -0000 On Mon, Jun 4, 2012 at 4:11 PM, Rusty Nejdl wrote: > On 2012-06-02 12:16, Steve Tuts wrote: > >> Hi, we have a Dell poweredge server with a dozen interfaces. It hosts a >> few guests of web app and email servers with VirtualBox-4.0.14. The host >> and all guests are FreeBSD 9.0 64bit. Each guest is bridged to a distinct >> interface. The host and all guests are set to 10.0.0.0 network NAT'ed to >> a >> cicso router. >> >> This runs well for a couple months, until we added a new guest recently. >> Every few hours, none of the guests can be connected. We can only connect >> to the host from outside the router. We can also go to the console of the >> guests (except the new guest), but from there we can't ping the gateway >> 10.0.0.1 any more. The new guest just froze. >> >> Furthermore, on the host we can see a vboxheadless process for each guest, >> including the new guest. But we can not kill it, not even with "kill -9". >> We looked around the web and someone suggested we should use "kill >> -SIGCONT" first since the "ps" output has the "T" flag for that >> vboxheadless process for that new guest, but that doesn't help. We also >> tried all the VBoxManager commands to poweroff/reset etc that new guest, >> but they all failed complaining that vm is in Aborted state. We also >> tried >> VBoxManager commands to disconnect the network cable for that new guest, >> it >> didn't complain, but there was no effect. >> >> For a couple times, on the host we disabled the interface bridging that >> new >> guest, then that vboxheadless process for that new guest disappeared (we >> attempted to kill it before that). And immediately all other vms regained >> connection back to normal. >> >> But there is one time even the above didn't help - the vboxheadless >> process >> for that new guest stubbonly remains, and we had to reboot the host. >> >> This is already a production server, so we can't upgrade virtualbox to the >> latest version until we obtain a test server. >> >> Would you advise: >> >> 1. is there any other way to kill that new guest instead of rebooting? >> 2. what might cause the problem? >> 3. what setting and test I can do to analyze this problem? >> ______________________________**_________________ >> > > I haven't seen any comments on this and don't want you to think you are > being ignored but I haven't seen this but also, the 4.0 branch was buggier > for me than the 4.1 releases so yeah, upgrading is probably what you are > looking at. > > Rusty Nejdl > ______________________________**_________________ > > sorry, just realize my reply yesterday didn't go to the list, so am re-sending with some updates. Yes, we upgraded all ports and fortunately everything went back and especially all vms has run peacefully for two days now. So upgrading to the latest virtualbox 4.1.16 solved that problem. But now we got a new problem with this new version of virtualbox: whenever we try to vnc to any vm, that vm will go to Aborted state immediately. Actually, merely telnet from within the host to the vnc port of that vm will immediately Abort that vm. This prevents us from adding new vms. Also, when starting vm with vnc port, we got this message: rfbListenOnTCP6Port: error in bind IPv6 socket: Address already in use , which we found someone else provided a patch at http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.os.freebsd.devel.emulation/10237 So looks like when there are multiple vms on a ipv6 system (we have 64bit FreeBSD 9.0) will get this problem.