On 09/13/2012 04:14 AM, Osier Yang wrote: > > If you want to use the default NAT network, but to use your own > DHCP server instead of dnsmasq, patches/RFC/ideas are welcomed > (libvir-list@xxxxxxxxxx). > If you want to use network in mode other than NAT. You won't have > to suffer from the dnsmasq. For the network XML format: That's not exactly correct. Any network defined with <forward mode='nat'>, <forward mode='route'>, or no forward element at all, will result in libvirtd creating a new bridge device for that network. If the network also has an IP address defined, then a dnsmasq instance will be started, listening *only* on that IP address (i.e. only on the bridge) for DNS requests. If the <ip> element also has a <dhcp> section, then the dnsmasq instance will also listen on the dhcp port *only* on the bridge. For <forward mode='bridge'> and <forward mode='hostdev'>, no bridge device is created by libvirt, no IP address is configured on the host, and no dnsmasq is started. _______________________________________________ libvirt-users mailing list libvirt-users@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/libvirt-users
