This is an archived copy of the Xen.org mailing list, which we have preserved to ensure that existing links to archives are not broken. The live archive, which contains the latest emails, can be found at http://lists.xen.org/
Home Products Support Community News


Re: [Xen-devel] No network device problem in -testing

On Mon, Feb 06, 2006 at 06:58:56PM +0100, Molle Bestefich wrote:

> 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.

Go for it.  We do have a manual as well -- if you added it to that too,
then we'd certainly appreciate it (everyone knows that developers don't
like to write docs ;-)

> 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.
> But:
>  1.) Why doesn't Xen do the same for eth1 and upwards?

Have you tried running the network-bridge script with vifnum=1?  If that
doesn't do it, then that's a bug.  If you want to permanently configure
your system so that both eth0 and eth1 are bridged, then see the workaround
at the end of bug #332.

>  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.

I'm not sure, but I guess for performance.  You don't want your packets
to be taking an extra hop through the kernel if you can avoid it.


Xen-devel mailing list