Search Results

Search found 408 results on 17 pages for 'guests'.

Page 2/17 | < Previous Page | 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12  | Next Page >

  • Accessing guests on virtual network when connected to host via PPTP

    - by Viktor Elofsson
    I'm setting up a development machine which runs Ubuntu 12.04 and KVM for virtualization. I have a guest running Ubuntu 12.04 which can be accessed from the host via its IP address which is assigned by libvirt. The guest can also access the internet, no problem there. However, now I want to setup PPTP so I can connect to the host (from my workstation running Windows 7) and directly access guests without relying on SSH port forwarding. I can connect from my W7-machine to the host (PPTP), but I cannot access any virtual machines (which are accessable from the host directly). Relevant configuration files cat /etc/network/interfaces auto lo iface lo inet loopback # device: eth0 auto eth0 iface eth0 inet static address x.x.x.x broadcast x.x.x.x netmask x.x.x.x gateway x.x.x.x # default route to access subnet up route add -net x.x.x.x netmask x.x.x.x gw x.x.x.x eth0 virsh net-edit default <network> <name>default</name> <uuid>xxxxxxxx-72ce-3c20-af0f-d3a010f1bef0</uuid> <forward mode='nat'/> <bridge name='virbr0' stp='on' delay='0' /> <mac address='52:54:00:xx:xx:xx'/> <ip address='192.168.122.1' netmask='255.255.255.0'> <dhcp> <range start='192.168.122.2' end='192.168.122.254' /> <host mac='52:54:00:yy:yy:yy' name='web1' ip='192.168.122.11' /> </dhcp> </ip> </network> cat /etc/pptpd.conf (commented lines removed) # TAG: option # Specifies the location of the PPP options file. # By default PPP looks in '/etc/ppp/options' # option /etc/ppp/pptpd-options # TAG: logwtmp # Use wtmp(5) to record client connections and disconnections. # logwtmp #(Recommended) localip 192.168.122.1 remoteip 192.168.122.234-238,192.168.122.245 cat /etc/ppp/chap-secrets* # Secrets for authentication using CHAP # client server secret IP addresses xxxxx * yyyyyyyyyy 192.168.122.100 I get the correct IP address when connecting my W7-machine, but when I try to ping the virtual machine at 192.168.122.11 I get Reply from 192.168.122.1: Destination port unreachable. It's probably something trivial I'm missing but I can't for the life of me figure out what it is. So I'm turning to you, serverfault.

    Read the article

  • Gateway on a virtual network interface used by LXC guests

    - by linkdd
    I'm currently having some problems with configuring a gateway for a virtual network interface. Here is what I've done : I created a virtual network interface : # brctl addbr lxc0 # brctl setfd lxc0 0 # ifconfig lxc0 192.168.0.1 promisc up # route add -net default gw 192.168.0.1 lxc0 The output of ifconfig gave me what I wanted : lxc0 Link encap:Ethernet HWaddr 22:4f:e4:40:89:bb inet adr:192.168.0.1 Bcast:192.168.0.255 Masque:255.255.255.0 adr inet6: fe80::88cf:d4ff:fe47:3b6b/64 Scope:Lien UP BROADCAST RUNNING PROMISC MULTICAST MTU:1500 Metric:1 RX packets:623 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 frame:0 TX packets:7412 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 carrier:0 collisions:0 lg file transmission:0 RX bytes:50329 (49.1 KiB) TX bytes:335738 (327.8 KiB) I configured dnsmasq to provide a DNS server (using the default : 192.168.1.1) and a DHCP server. Then, my LXC guest is configured like this : lxc.network.type=veth lxc.network.link=lxc0 lxc.network.flags=up Every thing is working perfectly, my containers have an IP (192.168.0.57 and 192.168.0.98). I can ping the host and the containers from the containers and from the host : (host)# ping -c 3 192.168.0.114 PING 192.168.0.114 (192.168.0.114) 56(84) bytes of data. 64 bytes from 192.168.0.114: icmp_req=1 ttl=64 time=0.044 ms 64 bytes from 192.168.0.114: icmp_req=2 ttl=64 time=0.038 ms 64 bytes from 192.168.0.114: icmp_req=3 ttl=64 time=0.043 ms --- 192.168.0.114 ping statistics --- 3 packets transmitted, 3 received, 0% packet loss, time 1998ms rtt min/avg/max/mdev = 0.038/0.041/0.044/0.007 ms (guest)# ping -c 3 192.168.0.1 PING 192.168.0.1 (192.168.0.1) 56(84) bytes of data. 64 bytes from 192.168.0.1: icmp_req=1 ttl=64 time=0.048 ms 64 bytes from 192.168.0.1: icmp_req=2 ttl=64 time=0.042 ms 64 bytes from 192.168.0.1: icmp_req=3 ttl=64 time=0.042 ms --- 192.168.0.1 ping statistics --- 3 packets transmitted, 3 received, 0% packet loss, time 1999ms rtt min/avg/max/mdev = 0.042/0.044/0.048/0.003 ms Now, it's time to configure the host as a gateway for the network 192.168.0.0/24 : #!/bin/sh # Clear rules iptables -F iptables -t nat -F iptables -t mangle -F iptables -X iptables -A FORWARD -i lxc0 -o eth0 -j ACCEPT iptables -A FORWARD -i eth0 -o lxc0 -m state --state ESTABLISHED,RELATED -j ACCEPT iptables -t nat -A POSTROUTING -o eth0 -j MASQUERADE echo 1 > /proc/sys/net/ipv4/ip_forward The final test failed completely, ping the outside : (guest)# ping -c 3 google.fr PING google.fr (173.194.67.94) 56(84) bytes of data. From 192.168.0.1: icmp_seq=3 Redirect Host(New nexthop: wi-in-f94.1e100.net (173.194.67.94)) From 192.168.0.1 icmp_seq=1 Destination Host Unreachable From 192.168.0.1 icmp_seq=2 Destination Host Unreachable From 192.168.0.1 icmp_seq=3 Destination Host Unreachable --- google.fr ping statistics --- 3 packets transmitted, 0 received, +3 errors, 100% packet loss, time 2017ms Did I missed something ?

    Read the article

  • Windows Server Hyper-V guests cannot see each other on network

    - by Noldorin
    I have a Hyper-V physical machine along with two standard laptops running within my LAN (connected by an ASUS-RT56U router). The physical server runs Windows Hyper-V Server 2008 R2, with two Windows Server 2008 R2 (full) guest VMs installed and running within. Both laptops run Windows 7. All OSs are 64-bit. Opening up Network in Windows Explorer on either of the two laptops displays both of the laptops in the LAN fine. However, neither of the guest VMs on the server (nor the host itself) are displayed. Indeed, the guest VMs can not see each other in Network view either. I can ping all computers (laptops and servers) without problems from within the LAN, but all of the servers are simply not visible from anywhere. In addition, the Network Map screen (accessible via Network and Sharing centre) gives me an error message: "An error happened during the mapping process." And I'm suspecting this might have something to do with how LLTP (Link Layer Topology Protocol) is working on the network. Worth noting though is that before my server was on the network, the Network Map screen displayed fine (as far as I can remember).

    Read the article

  • Windows Server Hyper-V guests cannot see each other on network

    - by Noldorin
    I have a Hyper-V physical machine along with two standard laptops running within my LAN (connected by an ASUS-RT56U router). The physical server runs Windows Hyper-V Server 2008 R2, with two Windows Server 2008 R2 (full) guest VMs installed and running within. Both laptops run Windows 7. All OSs are 64-bit. Opening up Network in Windows Explorer on either of the two laptops displays both of the laptops in the LAN fine. However, neither of the guest VMs on the server (nor the host itself) are displayed. Indeed, the guest VMs can not see each other in Network view either. I can ping all computers (laptops and servers) without problems from within the LAN, but all of the servers are simply not visible from anywhere. In addition, the Network Map screen (accessible via Network and Sharing centre) gives me an error message: "An error happened during the mapping process." And I'm suspecting this might have something to do with how LLTP (Link Layer Topology Protocol) is working on the network. Worth noting though is that before my server was on the network, the Network Map screen displayed fine (as far as I can remember).

    Read the article

  • KVM network bridge and public static IP for both host and guests

    - by Javier Martinez
    I have a Debian Server with 4 public static addresses. There is a KVM guest (also Debian) installed and running. What I want is to give the guest an IP of the host, so that both machines have public IPs. IP 1: 188.165.A.B IP 2: 178.33.CCC.D IP 3: 178.33.CCC.E IP 4: 178.33.CCC.F What should I do to have connection for host and guest ? This is network conf: # ifconfig br0 Link encap:Ethernet HWaddr e8:40:f2:0a:cc:28 inet addr:188.165.A.B Bcast:188.165.255.255 Mask:255.255.255.0 inet6 addr: fe80::ea40:f2ff:fe0a:cc28/64 Scope:Link UP BROADCAST RUNNING MULTICAST MTU:1500 Metric:1 RX packets:3618 errors:0 dropped:4 overruns:0 frame:0 TX packets:4853 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 carrier:0 collisions:0 txqueuelen:0 RX bytes:599562 (585.5 KiB) TX bytes:1693443 (1.6 MiB) eth0 Link encap:Ethernet HWaddr e8:40:f2:0a:cc:28 inet6 addr: fe80::ea40:f2ff:fe0a:cc28/64 Scope:Link UP BROADCAST RUNNING MULTICAST MTU:1500 Metric:1 RX packets:4274 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 frame:0 TX packets:4879 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 carrier:0 collisions:0 txqueuelen:1000 RX bytes:720045 (703.1 KiB) TX bytes:1715641 (1.6 MiB) Interrupt:20 Memory:fe500000-fe520000 eth0:0 Link encap:Ethernet HWaddr e8:40:f2:0a:cc:28 inet addr:178.33.CCC.D Bcast:178.33.255.255 Mask:255.255.255.255 UP BROADCAST RUNNING MULTICAST MTU:1500 Metric:1 Interrupt:20 Memory:fe500000-fe520000 eth0:1 Link encap:Ethernet HWaddr e8:40:f2:0a:cc:28 inet addr:178.33.CCC.E Bcast:178.33.255.255 Mask:255.255.255.255 UP BROADCAST RUNNING MULTICAST MTU:1500 Metric:1 Interrupt:20 Memory:fe500000-fe520000 eth0:2 Link encap:Ethernet HWaddr e8:40:f2:0a:cc:28 inet addr:178.33.CCC.F Bcast:178.33.255.255 Mask:255.255.255.255 UP BROADCAST RUNNING MULTICAST MTU:1500 Metric:1 Interrupt:20 Memory:fe500000-fe520000 lo Link encap:Local Loopback inet addr:127.0.0.1 Mask:255.0.0.0 inet6 addr: ::1/128 Scope:Host UP LOOPBACK RUNNING MTU:16436 Metric:1 RX packets:27932 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 frame:0 TX packets:27932 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 carrier:0 collisions:0 txqueuelen:0 RX bytes:1820862 (1.7 MiB) TX bytes:1820862 (1.7 MiB) vnet0 Link encap:Ethernet HWaddr fe:54:00:87:40:ec inet6 addr: fe80::fc54:ff:fe87:40ec/64 Scope:Link UP BROADCAST RUNNING MULTICAST MTU:1500 Metric:1 RX packets:18 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 frame:0 TX packets:204 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 carrier:0 collisions:0 txqueuelen:500 RX bytes:1452 (1.4 KiB) TX bytes:16958 (16.5 KiB) #route Kernel IP routing table Destination Gateway Genmask Flags Metric Ref Use Iface default aa.bb.cc.eu 0.0.0.0 UG 0 0 0 br0 188.165.255.0 * 255.255.255.0 U 0 0 0 br0 # brctl show bridge name bridge id STP enabled interfaces br0 8000.e840f20acc28 no eth0 vnet0 There is no firewall enabled and DNS is configured properly. What I want to achieve: | | | +----+-------------------------+-+------+ | | Host | | | | | | | | | | +------------+------+ | | eth0 | eth0:0-1 | | | 188.165.A.B | | | | | | | | | br0 vnet0 | | | +------------+------+ | | | | | | | | +------------+------+ | | | | | | | | eth0:2-+ | | | | 178.33.CCC.F | | | | | | | | Guest | | | +-------------------+ | +---------------------------------------+ Thanks you

    Read the article

  • KVM network bridge and public static IP for both host and guests

    - by Javier Martinez
    I have a Debian Server with 4 public static addresses. There is a KVM guest (also Debian) installed and running. What I want is to give the guest an IP of the host, so that both machines have public IPs. IP 1: 188.165.A.B IP 2: 178.33.CCC.D IP 3: 178.33.CCC.E IP 4: 178.33.CCC.F What should I do to have connection for host and guest ? This is network conf: # ifconfig br0 Link encap:Ethernet HWaddr e8:40:f2:0a:cc:28 inet addr:188.165.A.B Bcast:188.165.255.255 Mask:255.255.255.0 inet6 addr: fe80::ea40:f2ff:fe0a:cc28/64 Scope:Link UP BROADCAST RUNNING MULTICAST MTU:1500 Metric:1 RX packets:3618 errors:0 dropped:4 overruns:0 frame:0 TX packets:4853 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 carrier:0 collisions:0 txqueuelen:0 RX bytes:599562 (585.5 KiB) TX bytes:1693443 (1.6 MiB) eth0 Link encap:Ethernet HWaddr e8:40:f2:0a:cc:28 inet6 addr: fe80::ea40:f2ff:fe0a:cc28/64 Scope:Link UP BROADCAST RUNNING MULTICAST MTU:1500 Metric:1 RX packets:4274 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 frame:0 TX packets:4879 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 carrier:0 collisions:0 txqueuelen:1000 RX bytes:720045 (703.1 KiB) TX bytes:1715641 (1.6 MiB) Interrupt:20 Memory:fe500000-fe520000 eth0:0 Link encap:Ethernet HWaddr e8:40:f2:0a:cc:28 inet addr:178.33.CCC.D Bcast:178.33.255.255 Mask:255.255.255.255 UP BROADCAST RUNNING MULTICAST MTU:1500 Metric:1 Interrupt:20 Memory:fe500000-fe520000 eth0:1 Link encap:Ethernet HWaddr e8:40:f2:0a:cc:28 inet addr:178.33.CCC.E Bcast:178.33.255.255 Mask:255.255.255.255 UP BROADCAST RUNNING MULTICAST MTU:1500 Metric:1 Interrupt:20 Memory:fe500000-fe520000 eth0:2 Link encap:Ethernet HWaddr e8:40:f2:0a:cc:28 inet addr:178.33.CCC.F Bcast:178.33.255.255 Mask:255.255.255.255 UP BROADCAST RUNNING MULTICAST MTU:1500 Metric:1 Interrupt:20 Memory:fe500000-fe520000 lo Link encap:Local Loopback inet addr:127.0.0.1 Mask:255.0.0.0 inet6 addr: ::1/128 Scope:Host UP LOOPBACK RUNNING MTU:16436 Metric:1 RX packets:27932 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 frame:0 TX packets:27932 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 carrier:0 collisions:0 txqueuelen:0 RX bytes:1820862 (1.7 MiB) TX bytes:1820862 (1.7 MiB) vnet0 Link encap:Ethernet HWaddr fe:54:00:87:40:ec inet6 addr: fe80::fc54:ff:fe87:40ec/64 Scope:Link UP BROADCAST RUNNING MULTICAST MTU:1500 Metric:1 RX packets:18 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 frame:0 TX packets:204 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 carrier:0 collisions:0 txqueuelen:500 RX bytes:1452 (1.4 KiB) TX bytes:16958 (16.5 KiB) #route Kernel IP routing table Destination Gateway Genmask Flags Metric Ref Use Iface default aa.bb.cc.eu 0.0.0.0 UG 0 0 0 br0 188.165.255.0 * 255.255.255.0 U 0 0 0 br0 # brctl show bridge name bridge id STP enabled interfaces br0 8000.e840f20acc28 no eth0 vnet0 There is no firewall enabled and DNS is configured properly. What I want to achieve: | | | +----+-------------------------+-+------+ | | Host | | | | | | | | | | +------------+------+ | | eth0 | eth0:0-1 | | | 188.165.A.B | | | | | | | | | br0 vnet0 | | | +------------+------+ | | | | | | | | +------------+------+ | | | | | | | | eth0:2-+ | | | | 178.33.CCC.F | | | | | | | | Guest | | | +-------------------+ | +---------------------------------------+ Thanks you

    Read the article

  • Hyper-V: Dedicated NIC for Guests VMs

    - by TheLizardKing
    I have two NIC cards and created a private virtual network for my virtual machines and unchecked "Allow management operating system to share this network adapter" which basically turns my Guest NIC into this sorta shell of a NIC card on the host machine and the only thing checked in it's properties is "Microsoft Virtual Network Switch Protocol" which I am fine with. Everything works and everything is connected. My issue is that for some reason my guest (Ubuntu Server with legacy network drivers) is not talking properly to my DHCP server. Specifically my DHCP server reserves the guest's IP address using it's MAC address but the guest isn't picking it up. It's picking up any old IP it can get and I can't even ping the hostname from another PC on the network but it pings fine if I use the IP. I see the guest showing up in my DHCP table but I can't get the reservation to stick. Is there some reason it's only partially communicating with my DHCP server? Pinging it's hostname on itself reveals it's using 127.0.0.1 instead of it's network IP. Is this an issue with the legacy drivers used in Hyper-V?

    Read the article

  • VMware two vSwitches Guests can't communicate between them

    - by Aaron R.
    I have some servers in this configuration: And I am not able, from VMGuest1, to ping either VMGuest3 or VMGuest4. I can, however, ping Host1 and Host2, which are attached to pSwitch1. The behavior is the same with VMGuest3 or 4 trying to ping VMGuest 1 or 2. I don't have promiscuity enabled for any of these switches, nor do I have a bridge set up inside ESXi for the virtual switches. I know that one of these options is usually necessary when trying to get connectivity between two virtual switches. These switches are connected, however, through their respective physical switches which are bridged together. Ping just times out, arp request looks like this: [root@vmguest1:~]# arp -a vmguest3 vmguest3.example.com (1.2.3.4) at <incomplete> on eth0 [root@vmguest1:~]# arp -a host1 host1.example.com (1.2.3.5) at 00:0C:64:97:1C:FF [ether] on eth0 VMGuest1 can reach hosts on pSwitch1, so why can't it get to hosts on vSwitch1 through pSwitch1 the same way?

    Read the article

  • Moving Domain Controller Guests between Hyper-V Hosts

    - by Jim
    We're moving our domain controller to a new Hyper-V host. I read it on TechNet about not using export on a VM running as DC (although I saw a lot of answers on TechNet suggesting doing so to move DC). What we plan to do is shutdown the VM, move the VHD to the new Hyper-V host, then create a new VM using that VHD. I don't think USN rollback would occur since it's like shutting down the VM and starting it back up. We have another Hyper-V host with a DC guest that will be running during the migration. All the hosts and VMs are running Windows Server 2008 R2. Is it a good way to move virtualize DC b/t hosts? If not, how should I proceed?

    Read the article

  • xen 4.0 squeeze fails to start guests with: launch_vm: SETVCPUCONTEXT failed

    - by mcr
    As Chris Benninger says over at: http://www.benninger.ca/?p=58 lots and lots of people have the problem with Squeeze and xen4.0 telling them: launch_vm: SETVCPUCONTEXT failed (rc=-1) but nobody seems to know what the solution is. I don't know either, but at least here, a solution might get recorded. In my case, I can start one guest machine. An identical configuration for a second machine fails. Whichever one I start first, is the one that runs, the other gets the error. I've got at least a dozen other systems (at my work) running great with Squeeze and 64-bit XEN, but not this new machine at home.

    Read the article

  • How to create profiles for guests?

    - by Anant
    I'm making a site, and will be allowing guests to vote/comment. How should I go about storing the user info? I wouldn't like the info to be cleared if someone deletes the cookie (SO handles guest users via cookies I guess). If someone clears cookies and changes the ip at once, then only should the guest user info should be lost. Should I use sessions in php for this?

    Read the article

  • How to connect the virtual networks of vmware guests running on different hosts?

    - by gyrolf
    In a test setup, we are running several virtual machines on a single vmware workstation host. All virtual machines are connected via a "host only" network. This runs fine up to 2 or 3 virtual machines (depending on the host hardware). To allow more virtual machines, we want to use more host machines. Details about the environment and applications: Host PCs are running Windows XP in a corporate intranet. VMware used is Workstation 6.5 Guests are running Windows Server 2003 All guests act as Web Servers One of the guests additionally acts as Windows File server, offering shared folders for the other guests to connect to. Restrictions: VMware guests shall not be visible from the intranet. Changes to the host PC are restricted by corporate policy. In the virtual network, no domain controller exists. All virtual machines are member of the same workgroup. Running the virtual network as NAT is possible. Port forwarding might be used if it does not conflict with ports used by the host PC. Looking for a solution, I found hints about using router or vpn software on the hosts, but without any details how to setup. (I found a similar question Sharing the network between 2 VMware hosts, but the answer was not sufficient for me.)

    Read the article

  • How do you get the IP addresses of KVM guests that are using a Bridge Network Device from the KVM host

    - by slm
    Does anyone know of a way using KVM to find out the IP addresses of KVM guests that are using a bridge interface (br0) through the KVM host? Currently I have br0 setup with a single NIC (eth0) included. The KVM host is a system running CentOS 5.6 in case that matters. The guests are also running CentOS 5.6. BTW, the guests do not just show up in the KVM host's arp table, I'm looking for better solutions and/or leads.

    Read the article

  • How to connect the virtual networks of vmware guests running on different hosts?

    - by gyrolf
    In a test setup, we are running several virtual machines on a single vmware workstation host. All virtual machines are connected via a "host only" network. This runs fine up to 2 or 3 virtual machines (depending on the host hardware). To allow more virtual machines, we want to use more host machines. Details about the environment and applications: Host PCs are running Windows XP in a corporate intranet. VMware used is Workstation 6.5 Guests are running Windows Server 2003 All guests act as Web Servers One of the guests additionally acts as Windows File server, offering shared folders for the other guests to connect to. Restrictions: VMware guests shall not be visible from the intranet. Changes to the host PC are restricted by corporate policy. In the virtual network, no domain controller exists. All virtual machines are member of the same workgroup. Running the virtual network as NAT is possible. Port forwarding might be used if it does not conflict with ports used by the host PC. Looking for a solution, I found hints about using router or vpn software on the hosts, but without any details how to setup. (I found a similar question Sharing the network between 2 VMware hosts, but the answer was not sufficient for me.)

    Read the article

  • Windows Server 2008 - one MAC Address, assign multiple external IP's to VirtualBoxes running as guests on host

    - by Sise
    Couldn't find any help @ google or here. The scenario: Windows Server 2008 Std x64 on i7-975, 12 GB RAM. The server is running in a data centre. One hardware NIC - RealTek PCIe GBE - one MAC Address. The data centre provides us 4 static external IP's. The first is assigned to the host by default of course. I have ordered all 4 IP's, the data centre can assign the available IP's to the physical MAC address of the given NIC only. This means one NIC, one MAC Address, 4 IP's. Everything works fine so far. Now, what I would like to have: Installed VirtualBox with 1-3 guests running, each gets it's own external IP assigned. Each of it should be an standalone Win Server 2008. It looks like the easiest way would be to put the guests into an virtual subnet and routing all data coming to the 2nd till 4th external IP through to this guests using there subnet IP's. I have been through the VirtualBox User Manuel regarding networking. What's not working: I can't use bridged networking without anything else, because the IP's are assigned to the one MAC address only. I can't use NAT networking because it does not allow access from outside or the host to the guest. I do not wanna use port forwarding. Host-only networking itself would not allow internet access, by sharing the default internet connection of the host, internet is granted from the guest to the outside but not from outside or the host to the guest. InternalNetworking is not really an option here. What I have tried is to create an additional MS Loopback adapter for a routed subnet, where the Vbox guests are in, now the idea was to NAT the internet connection to the loopback 'subnet'. But I can't ping the gateway from the guests. By using route command in the command shell or RRAS (static route, NAT) I didn't get there as well. Solutions like the following do work for the one way, but not for the way back: For your situation, it might be best to use the Host-Only adapter for ICS. Go to the preferences of VB itself and select network. There you can change the configuration for the interface. Set the IP address to 192.168.0.1, netmask 255.255.255.0. Disable the DHCP server if it isn't already and that's it. Now the Guest should get an IP from Windows itself and be able to get onto the internet, while you can also access the Host. Slowly I'm pretty stucked with this topic. There is a possibility I've just overlooked something or just didn't getting it by trying, especially using RRAS, but it's kinda hard to find useful howto's or something in the web. Thanks in advance! Best regards, Simon

    Read the article

  • Windows Server 2008 - one MAC Address, assign multiple external IP's to VirtualBoxes running as guests on host

    - by Sise
    Couldn't find any help @ google or here. The scenario: Windows Server 2008 Std x64 on i7-975, 12 GB RAM. The server is running in a data centre. One hardware NIC - RealTek PCIe GBE - one MAC Address. The data centre provides us 4 static external IP's. The first is assigned to the host by default of course. I have ordered all 4 IP's, the data centre can assign the available IP's to the physical MAC address of the given NIC only. This means one NIC, one MAC Address, 4 IP's. Everything works fine so far. Now, what I would like to have: Installed VirtualBox with 1-3 guests running, each gets it's own external IP assigned. Each of it should be an standalone Win Server 2008. It looks like the easiest way would be to put the guests into an virtual subnet and routing all data coming to the 2nd till 4th external IP through to this guests using there subnet IP's. I have been through the VirtualBox User Manuel regarding networking. What's not working: I can't use bridged networking without anything else, because the IP's are assigned to the one MAC address only. I can't use NAT networking because it does not allow access from outside or the host to the guest. I do not wanna use port forwarding. Host-only networking itself would not allow internet access, by sharing the default internet connection of the host, internet is granted from the guest to the outside but not from outside or the host to the guest. InternalNetworking is not really an option here. What I have tried is to create an additional MS Loopback adapter for a routed subnet, where the Vbox guests are in, now the idea was to NAT the internet connection to the loopback 'subnet'. But I can't ping the gateway from the guests. By using route command in the command shell or RRAS (static route, NAT) I didn't get there as well. Solutions like the following do work for the one way, but not for the way back: For your situation, it might be best to use the Host-Only adapter for ICS. Go to the preferences of VB itself and select network. There you can change the configuration for the interface. Set the IP address to 192.168.0.1, netmask 255.255.255.0. Disable the DHCP server if it isn't already and that's it. Now the Guest should get an IP from Windows itself and be able to get onto the internet, while you can also access the Host. Slowly I'm pretty stucked with this topic. There is a possibility I've just overlooked something or just didn't getting it by trying, especially using RRAS, but it's kinda hard to find useful howto's or something in the web. Thanks in advance! Best regards, Simon

    Read the article

  • Vmware Workstation, Win7 host, Ubuntu guests with Nat + Host-only networks but they cannot connect to the Internet

    - by Ikon
    I have a Win7 host machine with Vmware Workstation. In the workstation I have 3 Ubuntu installed. All 3 Ubuntu guests have a Nat network - to access the internet without asking the router for a local address - and a Host-only network - to connect all Ubuntu quests and the host in a private network for internal communication, without touching the router. When I try to make any of the Ubuntu quests to get data from the internet - assuming that they would figure out that the Nat-ed interface can access the requested data - they fail and report that there is no route to my query. If I disconnect the 2nd interface on the Ubuntu guests with the Host-only network and restart networking, they start to know the route to the internet. Odd, during the installation of the guests they asked which of the 2 given interfaces - with Nat and Host-only config - should be used to get updates during installation and they oddly managed to get the updates. Not so after the installation has finished and rebooted. I have checked the Virtual Network Editor that the Nat interface should use my real network card to access the net, so there should be no problem. I wish not to use the router's dhcp service to give the Ubuntu quests an address, and also I don't want the guests to be accessable from the local network directly, but only by the host - that's the Host-only network is for. Any suggestions? Edit: 192.168.189.0 is the Nat interface and 192.168.7.0 is the Host-only. $ route -n Kernel IP routing table Destination Gateway Genmask Flags Metric Ref Use Iface 192.168.7.0 0.0.0.0 255.255.255.0 U 0 0 0 eth1 192.168.189.0 0.0.0.0 255.255.255.0 U 0 0 0 eth0 0.0.0.0 192.168.189.2 0.0.0.0 UG 100 0 0 eth0

    Read the article

  • Cannot get 3D OpenGL support in Vmware guests, how can I fix this?

    - by jjapol
    I have been working at this problem for 2 days now. I cannot for the life of me enable 3D support in VMWare 9 guests. My specifications are: Hardware: Dell Latitude E5520 laptop. Processor: Intel i7-2620M CPU @ 2.70GHz × 4. Memory: 8GB. Video: Intel Sandybridge Mobile x86/MMX/SSE2 OS: Ubuntu 12.04.1 LTS, 32 bit. Vmware Workstation: 9.0.1 build-894247 Glxgears functions fine. Frame rate is ~60fps. Vmware guest: Windows 7 Starting the Windows 7 guest in VMware throws the following errors: No 3D support is available from the host. and Hardware graphics acceleration is not available. I've read through this VMware forum thread, but again the hardware in the post is different (nVidia). I've followed the instructions at this Ask Ubuntu post as closely as possible as the question is nearly the same as mine although my hardware is different. Answer 1 regarding setting mks.gl.allowBlacklistedDrivers = TRUE; in my vmx configuration file causes the VM to crash when it starts. The second answer I followed as closely as possible. I uninstalled VMware, Did sudo apt-get install build-essential linux-headers-$(uname -r) at a terminal, Added the PPA https://launchpad.net/~glasen/+archive/intel-driver, Then at a terminal did sudo apt-get update && sudo apt-get upgrade -y I reinstalled VMware and have the same results: no 3D in guests. I'm getting the feeling that something is awry with the Sandy Bridge driver, but I can't seem to come up with any solutions. Has anyone out there run across this problem also? By the way, the operation of the likes of Solidworks and AutoCad within a Windpws 7 guest does appear to be improved in VMware 9 vs VMware 8 in spite of the fact that 3D support is lacking in the Windows 7 guest. I'd also add that my glxinfo file was nearly identical to the glxinfo file posted at askubuntu.com/questions/181829/…. I had a total of seven minor differences per a comparison using Meld. –

    Read the article

  • VirtualBox - multiple guests, each with a single bridged adapter?

    - by Martin
    I am running a dedicated server (located at Hetzner, Germany) that runs VirtualBox in order to virtualize several services accross multiple virtual guests. Those guests are supposed to communicate with each other (for instance, a virtual web server has to access a virtual database server); to be reachable from the dedicated server (for instance, SSH access); and to access the Internet via the dedicated server (for instance, to download security updates) Currently, this is achieved by having host-only adapter vboxnet0 on the dedicated server and two virtual interfaces on each guest. There, virtual adapter eth0 is attached to vboxnet0 (to achieve (1) and (2)), virtual adapter eth1 is attached to VirtualBox' NAT (to achieve (3)). Via eth0, the guests have access to a DHCP and a DNS server, both running on the dedicated server (there, bound to vboxnet0). This allows me to assign custom IP addresses and names. Via eth1, VirtualBox pushes a proper route that enables each guest to access the Internet (via eth0 on the dedicated server). This setup with two virtual adapters frequently leads to problems and at leasts complicates many things. For instance, on the dedicated server there is OpenVPN which allows to access the virtual machines via the Internet; futhermore, there is Shorwall that controls the incoming and outgoing network traffic between the Internet, the dedicated server, and the individual virtual machines. Not to mention automatic installation of servers via PXE... Therefore, I would prefer to have only one single virtual adapter on each guest which would be used for both incoming and outgoing connections. As far as I understand, one would basically use a bridged interface for that very purpose. Now the question arises: Which interface on the dedicated server would the bridge use? eth0 on the host server is not an option, as this is prohibited by the provider. A virtual interface eth0:0 would not make any sense, as a bridge always uses a physical interface (eth0 in this case). Would it be possible to create a bridged interface in each virtual machine that would "dangle in the air"? Thus, without a complement on the dedicated server? How would I have to set up the routing on the host server? Please note that the host / dedicated server has only one network adapter (eth0) which is connected to the provider's network. Regards, Martin

    Read the article

  • KVM vs Hyper-V. Which hypervisor is best for windows guests?

    - by user198851
    I am currently testing openstack for windows guests (XP and 7). I have deployed openstack "all in one" on system with following specs Processor corei5. (4 physical cores and 8 Threads with HT Technology) RAM 8 GB. HD 500 GB. I have created 4 windows xp guests with 512MB RAM and 1VCPU. On each windows guest i have installed visual studio 2008 only. In nova.conf CPU Over-Commit ratio is 2 for better performance (as mentioned in openstack operation guide). Using KVM as hyerpvisor. I have observed poor performance when simultaneously using visual studio in four windows instances. How i can improve performance ? Should i use KVM or Hyper-V ? or any other suggestion ?

    Read the article

  • how to launch grub menu for ubuntu guests in virtualbox?

    - by Ubuntuser
    I have ubuntu 12.04 alpha installed in virtualbox. When the virtual machine is started, it boots directly to the login screen without showing the grub menu. How can I get the grub menu to show up on start? Please note: the graphics is broken after recent updates, so i cannot login and make the changes. it is stuck at the screen "Ubuntu is running on low graphics mode" and the mouse and other keys do not work. [URL=http://img862.imageshack.us/i/screenshotat20120127171.png/][IMG]http://img862.imageshack.us/img862/9783/screenshotat20120127171.th.png[/IMG][/URL]

    Read the article

  • Can I run 64-bit VM guests on a 32-bit host?

    - by Maestro1024
    Can I run 64-bit VM guests on a 32-bit host? If I have a physical PC with 32 bit can I launch a VM that is 64 bit? What virtual machine software (Virtual PC or VirtualBox or other) would allow this? I read out there that VMware may support this but I am looking for something Open source or free. Host would preferably be a Windows host but could be Linux. Guest needs to be Windows. Thanks

    Read the article

  • Why Virtual Box won't give me option to create 64 bits guests?

    - by Eduardo Born
    My host is x64 bits Windows 8.1. I downloaded the latest Virtual Box (4.3) and I'm trying to create a VM with a 64 bits Ubuntu OS (ubuntu-12.04.3-desktop-amd64). When I go to New VM wizard, it doesn't give me option to select "Ubuntu (x64)" as I have seen in other people's screenshots, only just "Ubuntu". As a result, the ISO can't boot. I tried in another PC and Virtual Box gives the x64 variants to most listed OS... Control Panel shows x64 OS, x64 processor. My host laptop is a Sony Vaio VPCZ22UGX/N, Intel® Core™ i7-2640M processor. CPUz shows Vx-t is available on my processor, of course. Here is what I tried so far: I enabled IO APIC as required in the docs. I have virtualization enabled in the BIOS. It works fine in VMware. Check that Hyper-V is not running or even installed on my Windows. Same for VMware. I also tried running the command: VBoxManage modifyvm [vmname] --longmode on for that VM, but no change.. I think the issue is really that I can't select x64 variant of the Ubuntu OS for that VM. Other people seem to indicate that's a requirement, but I don't get that option for some reason. I spent a lot of time and can't find what's wrong... Anyone knows what could be missing here? Thank you very much!! Eduardo

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12  | Next Page >