The Windows Server 2008 R2 VF support for the Intel 82576 Ethernet controller is still under development. Looks like it will be available maybe around August or so.
I wish we had drivers for everything available, unfortunatly engineering resources are limited so we have to prioritize some drivers over others.
Thnak you.
I will try again around August/September.
Is there a way to subscribe to notices that a new version of the NIC drivers is available?
Thanks again for your help
You can get an RSS feed from the Intel Download Center although getting the feed is not obvious. Here are steps for signing up for an RSS feed for any product:
http://feeds.downloadcenter.intel.com/rss/?p=3024&lang=eng is the English language link to the RSS feed for downloads associated with the Intel® 82576 Gigabit Ethernet Controller.
The RSS feed will show updated files everytime a new software version is released, but the feed will not tell you what is new. Adding new VF driver support is a big change that would be reflected in the What's New section of the release notes (readme.txt).
You can also see the software change highlights listed at What is new in the latest Intel® Ethernet Software release?.
I should also mention that if you require a VF driver for Windows Server 2008 R2 on a gigabit adapter now, the VF driver is available for the Intel® Ethernet I350 Server Adapter Family. I am not sure if buying new adapters makes sense for you, but I wanted you to know that the VF driver was available so you can consider all your options.
Mark H
Mark,
Thank you very much for the information.
I subscribed to the RSS and I am evaluating purchasing an I350T2 for my home server.
I am currently running Centos 6.2 & KVM with the open source drivers.
Is there a big advantage in installing the Intel drivers for Linux on the host?
Thanks again for your help
The kernel drivers are made by Intel as well. Same base source code as you find on Source Forge.
There is not a big difference between the two.
Hi ,
Another question about 82599 chip...
There are two 10G ports in 82599, each one has one PF and maximum 63 VFs. I know in one port, the PF and VF can communicate with each other by internal switch in 82588, how about the VF between different port? Can they communicate each other by the internal switch in 82599?
Thanks!
Mark
You are correct that VF's on the same PF can communicate with each other through the internal switch.
However VF's on different PF's must communicate via an extneral switch.
Thanks for visiting the blog and I hope this was helpful.
- Patrick
Hello,
I ended up buying an I-350 T2 so I could use the VFs in both Windows and Linux VMs. It has been working great for a month, with traffic mainly going to the rest of the network (via gigabit switch).
I am now having an issue communicating between VMs. Both PFs are connected to a gigabit switch.
The host can communicate with both Windows and Linux VMs. The issue is in the communication between VMs. It fails using VFs on the same PF or across 2 PFs (and the switch).
Any advise on where to look for the issues?
I am running Centos 6.2 and KVM. Windows VM is Win 2008 R2. Linux VM is Centos 6.2. Both VMs are fully up to date.
Thank you for your help.
Hello,
A little more info:
- Communication works between Windows VMs
- Communication works from Windows VM to Linux VM (ping, shares, etc)
- Communication does not work between Linux VMs
- Communication does not work from Linux VM to Windows VM
Linux VM igbvf driver version 2.0.0-k. Is that correct?
The latest driver from the Intel website is 1.1.5
Linux Host igb driver version 3.4.7
Thank you
Hello,
I installed igbvf driver version 1.1.5 from SourceForge, rebooted, and had the same issues.
Still can not see other VMs that use a VF of the same I350-T2 NIC.
Thank you very much for your help.
My guess is the firewall configuration on your linux VM's. I always have to configure them for communication. Please take a look at that. First disable the firewall completely and see if you can communicate as you desire and go from there.
Let us know what you find.
thanx,
Patrick
Patrick,
thank you for your help.
The firewall does not seem to be the issue. I get the same behavior. I have 4 VMs: 2 Windows (let's call them W1 and W2) and 2 Linux (L1 and L2). I also have a Linux host (Host) that connect thru a gigabit switch.
W1 ping to W2: OK
W2 ping to W1: OK
W1 ping to either L1 or L2: OK
W2 ping to either L1 or L2: OK
L1 or L2 ping to W1 or W2 : Fails
L1 ping to L2: Fails
L2 ping to L1: Fails
Host ping to L1, L2, W1, W2: OK
L1, L2, W1, W2 ping to Host: OK
Seems like packets going from the Linux VM that should reach another VF get blocked.
By the way, all VMs use 2 VFs each. As far as I can tell, I pass a VF from each PF to each VM.
Does the rule that VFs with even numbers belong to one PF and the ones with odd numbers to the other still apply to the I350?
For example:
05:10.0 -> PF 0
05:10.1 -> PF 1
05:10.4 -> PF 0
05:10.5 -> PF 1
Thanks again for your help.
If you are able to ping from W1 and W2 to L1 and L2, then this means that L1 and L2 are successfully sending back the ping response to the Windows VM's.
This tells me that the VF's (and corrosponding drivers) are working correctly.
How do you have the two VF's configured?
Patrick,
Thank you for your help.
You have a good point.
The VF in the Linux VMs are configured with static IP. I also configured the VF in the Win VM with static IPs.
OS NIC IP PF:VF
Win 2k8R2 #0 .40 00:00
Win 2k8R2 #1 .41 01:00
Linux #0 .50 00:01
Linux #1 .51 01:01
.50 ping to .40 = dead
.50 ping to .41 = OK
.51 ping to .40 = OK
.51 ping to .41 = Dead
It looks like there is no response to ping when both VF are on the same PF. Pings across the switch work.
Is there any way to verify that the internal switch is enabled?
Thank you for your help
The internal switch is definately enabled, or else no VF would be able to communicate.
Can the PF's communicate with each other? Are they configured with VLAN's or different subnets?
Are the MAC addresses all unique?
Earlier you said that each VM has 2 VF's - do you configure both? Different IP's, or are they teamed?
