Solved VMWARE WKS 17 - Bridged networking doesn't work Now SOLVED

Hi folks
I can't get bridged networking to work properly in VMware WKS 17 -- it doesn't assign a physical ip address like 192.168.x.x for the guest which allows other machines etc to access it but assigns a private IP address e,g 172.x.x.x which is a pain. The only way around this as far as I can see is if you have 2 separate NIC's and use the 2nd nic in the VM which is not really the best way to do it.

With previous releases of VmWare WKS the VMware's Virtual NIC for the guest could function for bridged networks without any issue at all.

(I want to be able to access a Linux disk containing music /films /DVD' images etc from the Guest on to remote TV / amazon firestick via VLC / Kodi on those devices).

I'm going to try an experiment with Virtual Box to see if it's any better.

Currently using latest Windows insider preview (Std 24H2) W11 pro. Hyper-V also doesn't work properly with bridged network -- or at least I can't make it work.

cheers
jimbo



cheers
jimbo

Jimbo, I have not tried this 17.6 yet, and cannot right now as this machine is too underpowered for VMware so I'll have to do it in the morning. But, are you sure that when you selected bridged networking, that the virtual switch has bridged networking bridged to the correct network adapter in your system? That's the only explanation I can really think of.

hsehestedt said:

Jimbo, I have not tried this 17.6 yet, and cannot right now as this machine is too underpowered for VMware so I'll have to do it in the morning. But, are you sure that when you selected bridged networking, that the virtual switch has bridged networking bridged to the correct network adapter in your system? That's the only explanation I can really think of.

Click to expand...

Hi there
@hsehestedt

Bridged networking works properly in Virtual Box : (Note when installing - install the extensions as well).




As you can see the IP address is on 192.168.1.110 and is accessible from all other machines on LAN plus it has no problems with Guest / Host communication both ways. The 192.168.1.XXX range of addresses is what my LAN has and it's also managed by DHCP so no need for fixed IP address etc.

Pinging the host you can see the HOST address is on the same network with the IP address 192.168.1.190




If using SAMBA for linux file sharing with Windows etc then the only two things one needs to do are 1) ensure all machines in the same workgroup, and 2) the appropriate SMB level -- if using SMBV1 then in the samba config you have to specify it as NT1 which is rather obscure to say the least. !!!

Rather surprised as I hadn't used Virtual Box for years -- seems quite snappy too although the setup is a bit of a cludge to get right -- you can move / create Vdisks wherever you like but the thing stops dead if you move the Virtual box VM file ayway from its default -- This is only the VM definitions so not large files.

Going to mess around and see how much performance improvement I can get out of this plus trying other "Virtual Disk formats" and controllers VBOX supports.

So full marks to Oracle this time and a thumbs down for VMware 17.6 on installing Linux VM's -- might be different installing Windows systems though on VMWare - but I doubt it -- not wasting any more time with VMware WKS on Windows hosts until this issue is fixed.



Cheers
jimbo

Another thumbs up for VirtualBox

No problem attaching these Linux Discs to the VM via extenal USB SATA hub -- (Quite large capacities)and can now stream multi-media to remote TV's / fire sticks etc).




I've failed dismally with HYPER-V and VMware WKS with the network bridging which is essential to get this stuff working.

I used to HATE VBOX with a passion on Windows but it's really working now -- although its setup for VM's is still really cludgy. If you can get over that hurdle then brilliant. And while HYPER-V might be more efficient the hassle of not being able to dynamically attach / redirect USB devices -- that's a real show stopper IMHO.

Cheers
jimbo

Jimbo,

I just setup VMware Workstation Pro 17.6. I was able to tell my VM to use bridged networking but when I checked my Virtual Network settings in VMware I saw that there was NO bridged network defined. I had to create one and then all was good.

Test Conditions: VMware 17.6 on Win 24H2 Preview Release with the same as a guest.

After initial installation and setting a VM to use Bridged Network - note that it allowed this even though no bridged network exists!



After creating the bridged network:

Man, I'm loving this new version of VMware...

hsehestedt said:

Jimbo,

I just setup VMware Workstation Pro 17.6. I was able to tell my VM to use bridged networking but when I checked my Virtual Network settings in VMware I saw that there was NO bridged network defined. I had to create one and then all was good.

Test Conditions: VMware 17.6 on Win 24H2 Preview Release with the same as a guest.

After initial installation and setting a VM to use Bridged Network - note that it allowed this even though no bridged network exists!

View attachment 107564

After creating the bridged network:

View attachment 107566

Click to expand...

Hi there
But on the Guest did you see what the IP address of the Guest was -- On a LinuxGuest I used ip -c a to get the IP address of the guest and it still came up with "private" Lan addresses like 145.x.x or 10.x.x or whatever -- I couldn't get a physical 192.168.1.xxx address like I've shown in my screenshots -- I got the same VMnet info as you have shown but did you actually check the Guest's IP address -- if on linux and you don't have the latest Net commands e.g ip -c a you can still use ifconfig to get the details. Ipconfig is fine for windows guests.

Cheers
jimbo

Odd, I am getting good addresses and all is working fine. Again, I'm using purely Windows, no Linux.

In the screenshot below you can see the properties for both the physical machine and the VM at the same time. They both have addresses on the same subnet, as expected.

hsehestedt said:

Odd, I am getting good addresses and all is working fine. Again, I'm using purely Windows, no Linux.

In the screenshot below you can see the properties for both the physical machine and the VM at the same time. They both have addresses on the same subnet, as expected.

View attachment 107618

Click to expand...

Hi there
@hsehestedt

Going to have another go with VMWare WKS. Note that the issue is that OTHER machines on the same LAN should be able to access the Guest -- not just Host / Guest have intercommunication.

I'd suspect that other machines on your LAN would have address 192.168.4.X XX judging by the DHCP gateway which means those machines on 192.168.4.xxx wouldn't have access to the machine and its guest on 192.168.7.XXX

That was the problem I had with VMWare

With VBOX I had IP's of 192.168.1.XXX while my DHCP gateway is 192.168.1.1 and other machines on LAN had 192.168.1.XXX so everything accessible which is what I needed.

I might have set it up wrong -- anyway it's VM's so it's easy to junk them if no good or mistakes made. I don't think it's an issue of Linux or Windows guests -- it's purely Virtual networking from VmWare / Vbox. I'm using a windows host machine - so I'll try a Windows VM too to see if I can replicate your results. I'll try where I have 2 machines so I can test LAN access from a machine different from the HOST and its Guest.


Thanks for showing result of your test.


Re-created a VM with VMWare WKS -- I suspect that I'd hosed up the "Bridged" adapter in the VMWare Network editor -- deleted the NAT and Host only and added the bridged one - also one had to be in "Admin mode" to access the VMWare Network editor.

Now works perfectly. Marking as solved. The only question now is to see which Guest I can make the better performer !!!!

Here's the VMWare Guest on the same Windows Host.



To complete final test -- separate physical Linux machine with a Windows Guest

everything on Lan acessible from ALL machines including remote Guest to Remote Guest (on VMWare WKS with Windows HOST on remote and KVM/QEMU on Host Linux laptop with Windows Guest -- 100% intercommunication between the lot which is what I wanted .



Cheers
jimbo

Look at my subnet mask. Addresses in the 4.x and 7.x range are on the same subnet so they communicate just fine.