ICMP Ping Doesn't Work when Specifying the -I Option
When I run
ping -I and specify an interface I don’t get an echo-reply. However, when I run
ping without the
-I option everything works as expected. What is going on?
Specific Example for Issue
This example does not work:
cumulus@switch:default:~:# ping -I swp2 22.214.171.124 PING 126.96.36.199 (188.8.131.52) from 184.108.40.206 swp1.5: 56(84) bytes of data.
Whereas this example does work:
cumulus@switch:default:~:# ping 220.127.116.11 PING 18.104.22.168 (22.214.171.124) 56(84) bytes of data. 64 bytes from 126.96.36.199: icmp_req=1 ttl=63 time=4.00 ms 64 bytes from 188.8.131.52: icmp_req=2 ttl=63 time=0.000 ms 64 bytes from 184.108.40.206: icmp_req=3 ttl=63 time=0.000 ms 64 bytes from 220.127.116.11: icmp_req=4 ttl=63 time=0.000 ms ^C --- 18.104.22.168 ping statistics --- 4 packets transmitted, 4 received, 0% packet loss, time 3004ms rtt min/avg/max/mdev = 0.000/1.000/4.001/1.732 ms cumulus@switch:default:~:#
The image above has these IP addresses:
|Device||VLAN 2||VLAN 5|
|Cumulus Linux switch||22.214.171.124||126.96.36.199|
auto swp1 iface swp1 address 188.8.131.52/24 up ip route add 0.0.0.0/0 via 184.108.40.206 auto swp2 iface swp2 address 220.127.116.11/24
Cumulus Linux Switch
auto swp1 iface swp1 auto swp2 iface swp2 auto swp17 iface swp17 auto bridge_2 iface bridge_2 address 18.104.22.168/24 bridge-ports swp1 swp17 up ip route add 0.0.0.0/0 via 22.214.171.124 auto bridge_5 iface bridge_5 address 126.96.36.199/24 bridge-ports swp2
auto swp30 iface swp30 address 188.8.131.52/24 auto swp17 iface swp17 address 184.108.40.206/24 up ip route add 220.127.116.11/24 via 18.104.22.168
auto swp1 iface swp1 address 22.214.171.124/24 up route add -net 126.96.36.199/24 gw 188.8.131.52 up route add -net 184.108.40.206/24 gw 220.127.116.11
What is happening here? This behavior is actually as expected. You do not need to have an SVI (switch VLAN interface) on the Cumulus Linux switch (in this particular example) for a host on the hypervisor to reach the “internet” (simulated here by another Cumulus Linux switch). The host has one default route (0.0.0.0/0) to 18.104.22.168, so when you specify the
-I (interface) option, Cumulus Linux forces traffic to ARP for the destination (22.214.171.124) on the swp2 link between the Cumulus Linux switch and the hypervisor. There is no route on that interface (for that subnet) which forces the ARP on that link.
When you ping from the Internet router down to each SVI, both of them are reachable. If there are hosts on the hypervisor, both of them are reachable as well because they have a gateway configured on the Cumulus Linux switch. The
-I option forces the ARP and there is no route. If the hypervisor utilized namespaces to split the route table (allowing for dual default routes), you could ping from the hypervisor using the
-I option. There are also various ways not tested here to solve the dual routing issue, depending on what your hypervisor or host is doing in the situation (such as IP rules or containers).