Virtual Bridge problem.

[gwapscoffee]

Hello,


I've posted a similar thread before. Only that time, I manage to solve the issue using NAT rather than Bridge networking.

Now i can't afford to simulate in NAT.

Here is the scenario VirtualBox ver 3.2.8


Host PC Windows XP with IP address of 192.168.42.112. Subnet 255.255.255.0.
Gateway of 192.168.42.1. DNS of 192.168.42.3.


Guest OS Windows XP with IP address of 192.168.42.170. Subnet 255.255.255.0.
Gateway of 192.168.42.1. DNS of 192.168.42.3.

The ping between the host and the guest is smooth but the guest can't ping anything else. It also has no Internet connection.

[mick463]

The guest cannot get internet as the bridged network is for a local lan only ie through a switch. The only way you wil get internet is through nat.
What exactly are you trying to do with the bridged adapter.

[Perryg]

Actually the only requirement to be able to use Bridged (which will give you the Internet) is there needs to be a router (not a switch) in the network.
Looking at what you are showing it appears there may be a router unless you manually configured the addresses your self.

The ability to ping between the host and guest shows that the connection is made so now you need to see why you can not get to the Internet.
Try to ping the gateway which should be 192.168.42.1 and the DNS address 192.168.42.3 from the guest. Do the reply?
Also make sure that your firewall or virus software is not stopping you.
Another test is to ping yahoo.com and 69.147.125.65 to see if they both work. This will test the DNS

[gwapscoffee]

@Perryg,

The guestOS cannot ping any other computer on LAN not even the gateway(Our gateway is a watchguard UTM). The firewall on the HOST OS is off. although I have a Semantic EndPoint protection 11 installed.

[BillG]

The firewall on the host would have no effect on the traffic from the guest. (The host OS never sees this traffic.) Symantec or Watchguard might.

The only way to know for sure is to run a network monitor on the physical LAN and monitor the trafiic from the vm. It should look just like any other machine on the network if it is set to bridged.

[BillG]

The firewall on the host would have no effect on the traffic from the guest. (The host OS never sees this traffic.) Symantec or Watchguard might.

The only way to know for sure is to run a network monitor on the physical LAN and monitor the trafiic from the vm. It should look just like any other machine on the network if it is set to bridged.

Here is a sample from my network. S08R2dave is a vm bridged to the network. 192.168.0.1 is the gateway router. 192.168.0.3 is a physical machine on the LAN.

Netmon.png

[gwapscoffee]

There was this instance where I turned off the semantic endpoint protection and the VM was set to bridge. As far as I can remember that didn't work as well. That's why i got confused with this bridging.

I'm familiar with WireShark. Now, which is the more ideal to monitor the traffic? In the host or the guest os??

[ChipMcK]

Some reading material about NAT, Bridged, host
http://forums.virtualbox.org/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=29990
http://forums.virtualbox.org/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=32636
http://forums.virtualbox.org/viewtopic.php?f=8&t=32604

Best

[BillG]

There was this instance where I turned off the semantic endpoint protection and the VM was set to bridge. As far as I can remember that didn't work as well. That's why i got confused with this bridging.

I'm familiar with WireShark. Now, which is the more ideal to monitor the traffic? In the host or the guest os??

Monitor the traffic from a physical machine connected to the physical network, not from a vm.