• kernel: br0: received packet on eth0 with own address as source address (addr:so:me:th:in:gs:08, vlan:0)


    NewDisplayName
    • Solved

    Hey,

    so ive transplanted my old rigs mainboard into my old unraid server.

     

    Since my network give ip addreses out while looking at mac adresses, i changed /boot/config/network.cfg to my old unraids server mac adress.

    Quote

     


    HWADDR=X
     

     

     

    Its working fine, but still unraid flames about getting packets from his own address (which is wrong).

     

    Lets say old unraid has mac adress X

    Lets say old main rig has mac adress Y

     

    I put MB out of my old main rig and put it into the unraid server, telling him his mac adress is X.

    I then changed also my mac address on my new rig to be my old rigs one... (Y)

     

    So i think unraid should actually check for "HWADDR=X" instead of his actual "real mac adress" - bc whats the point in changing it? XD




    User Feedback

    Recommended Comments

    This error means something is misconfigured or two systems with the same MAC address exist on the network.

     

    You didn't give any information, start with including the diagnostics and what is the output of

    ifconfig eth0
    
    ifconfig br0

     

    Link to comment

    Yo, thats wrong. Or thats the bug. I dont know. Didnt thought you need anything for it as it clearly is a bug. 

     

    My router says it uses the correct mac address.

     

    Maybe its wrong network.cfg. But its annoying as hell.

     

    Quote


    root@Unraid-Server:~# ifconfig eth0
    eth0: flags=4419<UP,BROADCAST,RUNNING,PROMISC,MULTICAST>  mtu 1436
            inet6 fe80::9e5c:8eff:fe87:c408  prefixlen 64  scopeid 0x20<link>
            ether 9c:5c:8e:87:c4:08  txqueuelen 1000  (Ethernet)
            RX packets 32600954  bytes 35247793774 (32.8 GiB)
            RX errors 0  dropped 19  overruns 0  frame 0
            TX packets 3641011  bytes 1941987326 (1.8 GiB)
            TX errors 0  dropped 0 overruns 0  carrier 0  collisions 0
            device interrupt 16  memory 0xf7200000-f7220000 
     

     

     

     

     

     

    Quote

    root@Unraid-Server:~# ifconfig br

    br0: flags=4163<UP,BROADCAST,RUNNING,MULTICAST>  mtu 1436
            inet 192.168.86.2  netmask 255.255.255.0  broadcast 192.168.86.255
            inet6 fe80::dc32:66ff:fe14:eded  prefixlen 64  scopeid 0x20<link>
            ether d0:50:99:9d:0f:df  txqueuelen 1000  (Ethernet)
            RX packets 32795388  bytes 34715107232 (32.3 GiB)
            RX errors 0  dropped 0  overruns 0  frame 0
            TX packets 2793794  bytes 9321730956 (8.6 GiB)
            TX errors 0  dropped 0 overruns 0  carrier 0  collisions 0
     

     

     

    That is the correct MAC d0:50:99:9d:0f:df

     

    Maybe its just wrong network.cfg but i didnt found ANYTHING usefull about this on the internet.

     

     

    # Generated settings:
    IFNAME[0]="br0"
    BRNAME[0]="br0"
    BRSTP[0]="no"
    BRFD[0]="0"
    BRNICS[0]="eth0"
    DESCRIPTION[0]="LAN1"
    PROTOCOL[0]="ipv4"
    HWADDR=d0:50:99:9d:0f:df
    USE_DHCP[0]="yes"
    DHCP_KEEPRESOLV="yes"
    DNS_SERVER1="8.8.8.8"
    DNS_SERVER2="8.8.4.4"
    DNS_SERVER3="1.1.1.1"
    USE_DHCP6[0]="yes"
    DHCP6_KEEPRESOLV="no"
    MTU[0]="1436"
    SYSNICS="1"

     

    unraid-server-diagnostics-20190430-1001.zip

    Edited by nuhll
    Link to comment

    Some comments and advice

    • It is not recommended to change the MAC address, usually there is no true reason to do so.
      In your case you changed the vendor string from "Asus" to "ASrock" which is misleading to say the least
    • Any manual change in the network.cfg file will get lost whenever a update via the GUI is done
      If you insist, the correct syntax is HWADDR[0]="d0:50:99:9d:0f:df" (note the index and quotes)
    • The preferred solution is to assign the existing IP address to the new MAC address in your router configuration
    • The "bug" is that the MAC address of the interface isn't set correctly when the bridge function is enabled for that interface. A made a correction for this, but still recommend to use the solution given above.
    • Priority of this is "annoyance" (easy solvable by setting your router correctly)

     

    Link to comment


    Join the conversation

    You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
    Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

    Guest
    Add a comment...

    ×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

      Only 75 emoji are allowed.

    ×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

    ×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

    ×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Status Definitions

     

    Open = Under consideration.

     

    Solved = The issue has been resolved.

     

    Solved version = The issue has been resolved in the indicated release version.

     

    Closed = Feedback or opinion better posted on our forum for discussion. Also for reports we cannot reproduce or need more information. In this case just add a comment and we will review it again.

     

    Retest = Please retest in latest release.


    Priority Definitions

     

    Minor = Something not working correctly.

     

    Urgent = Server crash, data loss, or other showstopper.

     

    Annoyance = Doesn't affect functionality but should be fixed.

     

    Other = Announcement or other non-issue.