Ewan Mellor wrote:
> Those ip, netmask, and gateway parameters specify options for the Linux
> kernel command line. With these, you can persuade the guest to use the
> specified details, without having the guest preconfigured, but in
> general it's not a good way to work -- you can't specify addresses for
> multiple interfaces this way, in particular. The vif options specify
> the details given to the hotplug scripts when the devices come up.
> These details are used to configure DHCP, routing, or whatever inside
> dom 0 -- they don't necessarily affect the guest. You still need the
> guest to configure itself appropriately.
> The best thing to do is probably to use vif=, have a DHCP server inside
> dom0 (dhcp=yes in a couple of places) and then preconfigure the guest to
> expect their addresses via DHCP.
Ah. Super, thanks. The above belongs in the Wiki if you ask me.
If it's ok with you, I'll add it when I get some free time.
> The kernel command line options are probably most useful for developers, who
> just want to get things up and running quickly without configuring their guest
Personally I use it to assign domU IP addresses.
But then again, that's because I've never stumbled upon any
well-written documentation that told me not to - I just googled and
found something named 'ip=' which looked right, so I used that.
If you feel like doing more newbie tutoring (sorry....), another question:
It feels reasonable that Xen moves the physical ethernet interface to
peth0 and creates a virtual eth0 interface in dom0 - after all, dom0
is a virtual machine, it should have virtual interfaces that I can
play/do funky things with.
1.) Why doesn't Xen do the same for eth1 and upwards?
2.) Why doesn't Xen do this when using the non-bridged setup?
Seems completely illogical to me. Plus the incoherency makes it
really hard to write good documentation.
Xen-devel mailing list