I'm not sure I understand this egress firewall rules allowing
Outbound traffic comment.

Are you talking about the Source NAT or the Static NAT firewall?

In both cases, for the time being, I have no entries in either.
Doesn't that disable it?

Warren

-----Original Message-----
From: Oliver Leach [mailto:oliver.le...@tatacommunications.com] 
Sent: Wednesday, May 01, 2013 9:47 AM
To: users@cloudstack.apache.org; aemne...@gmail.com
Subject: RE: router not working

I am assuming you are using XenServer. Is the domain router's public vif
using the correct network on the XenServer? This is the same network as the
ssvm and the console proxy which you say can access the internet. If the
domain router is on the same host using the same network and the same vlan
as the SSVM and the CP, then it should be able to ping the internet. 

Potentially, the other thing to check is your egress firewall rules for
cloudstack network allows outbound traffic. 

Oliver
--

-----Original Message-----
From: Warren Nicholson [mailto:warren.nichol...@nfinausa.com] 
Sent: Wednesday, May 01, 2013 2:46 PM
To: users@cloudstack.apache.org; aemne...@gmail.com
Subject: RE: router not working

I dropped a direct connection to the HW using XenCenter, and statically
configured the IP.  That works fine, and I am able to get on the internet.

However, doing it this way, I've lost the firewall protection of the
Cloudstack Router.

I would still like to know why the router isn't working.....

Warren

-----Original Message-----
From: Ahmad Emneina [mailto:aemne...@gmail.com]
Sent: Tuesday, April 30, 2013 6:27 PM
To: Cloudstack users mailing list
Subject: Re: router not working

i would imagine your trunked public vlan is the issue. boot a vm and tag it
with the public vlan, see if it gets out. check the switches also, make sure
its trunked down properly.


On Tue, Apr 30, 2013 at 4:02 PM, Warren Nicholson <
warren.nichol...@nfinausa.com> wrote:

> When my router boots it can't ping its public side.
>
>
>
> What's up with that?
>
>
>
> Is the supplied router bad?
>
>
>
> Warren
>
>


Reply via email to