/srv/irclogs.ubuntu.com/2022/07/12/#ubuntu-server.txt

=== Hash is now known as stoned
=== Rhvs is now known as Rhys
=== DArqueBish0p is now known as DArqueBishop
=== kinghat5 is now known as kinghat
=== Skyrid3r is now known as Skyrider
=== not_phunyguy is now known as phunyguy
=== ChunkzZ is now known as Chunkyz
mohaHi15:27
mohaI have installed microstack within a VM (=172.16.250.10) and I can access the Horizon console on this IP from outside of the VM; When I create a machine in this Microstack, it generates an IP in the range of 10.20.x.x for the machine. How can I access to this machine (ex: 10.20.20.5) over the VM IP? I mean opening that 10.20.20.5 outside of the VM; I was thinking of having a router within the VM alongside the microstack, right?15:29
RoyKmoha: both 172.16.* and 10.* are addresses specified in rfc1918 - they are non-routable on the internet and typically have a nat router in front where you setup which ports should be forwarded to them15:40
RoyKmoha: alongside 192.168.*15:40
mohaI the 172 NATing is handled by the hypervisor. but I whant somehow route that 10.20.20.5 throught 172.x on a specific port15:41
mohawant*15:42
RoyKdunno - this isn't really standard ubuntu as far as I know, though15:42
mohaUbuntu is installed within the VM; Microstack's installed on Ubuntu.15:43
mohaShould I search for "How to configure Ubuntu as a router"?15:43
RoyKI guess you'll figure that out in Microstack15:51
RoyKI don't use that - I use kvm/libvirt - with that I use a bridge on my server (debian, not ubuntu, but generally the same thing), so that the VMs can connect to the network like anything else behind the router. It also allows for direct non-nat access for IPv6, which is nice15:53
RoyK!bridge15:53
RoyKhttps://www.tecmint.com/create-network-bridge-in-ubuntu/ might do15:54
znfwhat's that new annoying thing in 22.04 that asks you about services to be restarted every damn time you use apt?16:52
znfanswer: 'needrestart' package16:56
fricklerznf: if you find a way to disable that, I'd be interested to hear about it, too16:57
znfjust remove the needrestart package16:57
znfI don't need that sort of negativity in my life16:57
frickleroh, easy, thx17:00
RoyKYour mouse moved! Windows must be restarted for the change to take effect.17:04
ahasenackdoes anybody know if I should get (slightly) better performance when using Soft-RoCE instead of the normal network stack? For example, for an NFS server?19:04
ahasenackin a couple of test vms, I got actually 3x better performance without RoCE, but I'm unsure how much the fact these are VMs is interfering19:05
ahasenack(and they used virtio networking)19:05
patdk-lapwell, vm changes everything so19:05
sarnoldi've never heard of soft-roce but i'm not too surprised to hear virtio networking is pretty good already19:06
patdk-lapthe advantages of rdma just go downhill quick when using jumbo frames and expecially using tso, rso, gro, ...19:07
patdk-laplro I mean19:07
patdk-lapit's more the large packet rollups that make it all feel good19:07
patdk-lapoffloading all those packet stuff to hardware19:07
patdk-lapI found using infiniband with max mtu size, 64k I think, was near as fast as rdma19:08
patdk-lapand that is what offloading gets you without having to use extra large mtu sizes19:08
ahasenackI'll try on real hardware next (but still not specialized hardware, just off-the-shelf nics)19:16
patdk-lapwhat nic? most nics will support it19:16
ahasenackwhatever is in my laptops :)19:16
patdk-lapoh, not good nics at all19:17
ahasenacksome generic intel gigabit I think19:17
patdk-lapbut should still support offloading19:17
ahasenackI mean, it's *soft* RoCE19:17
ahasenackI'm not expecting a leap19:17
ahasenackbut was wondering if it would be better, since it would bypass the network stack, IIRC19:17
ahasenackor at least similar19:18
patdk-lapwell, it's just rdma hasn't been a huge push, since all the large packet offload and scatter/gather offload features got added to nics19:18
patdk-lapthe improvement of using rdma was very complex and minimal when compared19:18
ahasenackI see19:18
patdk-lapthe network stack in linux is so ideally tuned (for tcp atleast)19:18
patdk-lapit's kindof hard to do better :)19:18
patdk-lapanything is possible, and everything is highly different outcomes depending on exact usecase so :)19:19
patdk-lapwhen I did my big testing in 2011, jumboframes and rdma was ideal19:20
patdk-lapbut then a few years later, neither made sense, cause of large offloads, I even debated moving all my jumboframes back to 1500 mtu19:20
patdk-lapbut overall lazeness said, keep it the same, conversion takes time and energy :)19:20
ahasenackwell, this started with me trying to make sure rdma was being used, and the performance difference confirmed it, I just didn't expect it to be 3x slower ;)19:33
ahasenackbut I'll try outside of a vm next, to be more fair19:33
=== DArqueBish0p is now known as DArqueBishop
=== Bebef8 is now known as Bebef
=== NightMonkey_ is now known as NightMonkey
blackboxswHey folks, I just responded to a bug about lintian warnings we are receiving in cloud-init packaging because of the ~XX.YY.1 diminshed package version syntax "W: cloud-init source: binary-nmu-debian-revision-in-source 22.2-0ubuntu1~18.04.2"   If anyone gets a chance to look my response over tomorrow for corrections/omissions  that'd be great22:45
blackboxsw https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=1014584#1822:45
ubottuDebian bug 1014584 in lintian "lintian: False positive binary-nmu-debian-revision-in-source and source-nmu-has-incorrect-version-number with Ubuntu version" [Normal, Open]22:45
blackboxswit seems something changes in lintian within the last 6 months/year related to nmu version handling that is generating these lintian warnings as I don't recall seeing them during package builds even last year and cloud-init packaging has used the ~XX.YY.Z syntax for quite some time.22:46

Generated by irclog2html.py 2.7 by Marius Gedminas - find it at mg.pov.lt!