On Thu, Oct 15, 2009 at 08:32:03AM -0500, Anthony Liguori wrote: > Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: >> On Wed, Oct 14, 2009 at 05:53:56PM -0500, Anthony Liguori wrote: >> >>> I would be much more inclined to consider taking raw and improving >>> the performance long term if guest<->host networking worked. This >>> appears to be a fundamental limitation though and I think it's >>> something that will forever plague users if we include this feature. >>> >> >> In fact, I think it's fixable with a raw socket bound to a macvlan. >> Would that be enough? >> > > What setup does that entail on the part of a user? Wouldn't we be back > to square one wrt users having to run archaic networking commands in > order to set things up? Unlike bridge, qemu could set up macvlan without disrupting host networking. The only issue would be cleanup if qemu is killed. > Regards, > > Anthony Liguori > -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kvm" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
