Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
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.
But this would require additional features in macvlan, correct?
This also only works if a guest uses the mac address assigned to it,
correct? If a guest was bridging the virtual nic, this would all come
apart?
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
