[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

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

  • To: Ewan Mellor <ewan@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • From: Molle Bestefich <molle.bestefich@xxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Mon, 6 Feb 2006 18:58:56 +0100
  • Cc: Xen-devel <xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Delivery-date: Mon, 06 Feb 2006 18:10:46 +0000
  • Domainkey-signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=beta; d=gmail.com; h=received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; b=ilphSgYRsaNEDf9tWCyLgdxw1coyj83c2dFvE+JC+6+/9ZXM1fSQdemOp/MYU8aCaWgAdnrootOmcWR9akBtY3XTOy3lU1zgz/47TB8Hv0Vnw+AelvM2B5odRP9KDW9zO6m580wx2Hr1BqZfm6eV7Sc7TvvhCwA7wm1OWGOQUKQ=
  • List-id: Xen developer discussion <xen-devel.lists.xensource.com>

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
> properly.

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



Lists.xenproject.org is hosted with RackSpace, monitoring our
servers 24x7x365 and backed by RackSpace's Fanatical Support®.