2008/9/29 Evgeniy Sokolov <evg@xxxxxxxxxx>
Agree with you. You say about "how should it be". I say about "how is it now".
On Mon, Sep 29, 2008 at 04:11:39PM +0400, Evgeniy Sokolov wrote:
2008/9/29 Evgeniy V. Sokolov <evg@xxxxxxxxxxxxx <mailto:evg@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>>Patch looks good.
This behaviour contradicts with description found in docs
(in which
<source> tag specify interface in host, not in
container). I think,
the previous bridge must be specified as
<interface type='bridge'>
<mac address='00:16:3e:34:21:9e'/>
- <source bridge='eth10'/>
+ <target dev='eth10'/>
</interface>
You are right. It is bug.
Well, here is the patch, that fixes that behaviour.
Your patch is half of fix. It require to fix openvzReadNetworkConf() in
openvz_conf.c.
Here is a new one. Check it, please.
But currently it will work strange because of all drivers (except OpenVZ) in libvirt require specified <source bridge=""/> - it is generic.
With patch you need to specify both
<source bridge='eth10'/> - to satisfy common requirements
<target dev='eth10'/> - to create network
That is not right. The <target> element *must* be optional when creating
a new domain. If omitted, the driver must generated a suitable target
dev according to its desired naming scheme. Only the <source> element
can be compulsory
Currenty OpenVZ driver don't generate device name - my mistake.
Is vnet$i (where $i is the number of automatically generated interface
name for this container) appropriate?
name for this container) appropriate?
Daniel.
-- Libvir-list mailing list Libvir-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/libvir-list