Return-path: Envelope-to: www-data@colo.xensource.com Delivery-date: Tue, 04 Dec 2007 22:35:46 -0800 Received: from vm04-bcn-london.deploy.xenoserver.org ([217.147.82.229] helo=lists.xensource.com) by lists.xensource.com with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IznrF-0007Bz-Vf for www-data@colo.xensource.com; Tue, 04 Dec 2007 22:35:46 -0800 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.xensource.com) by host-192-168-0-1-bcn-london with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1Izns6-0007QO-RK; Wed, 05 Dec 2007 06:36:38 +0000 Received: from [192.168.0.10] (helo=lists.xensource.com) by host-192-168-0-1-bcn-london with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1Iznrm-00078p-4S for xen-users@lists.xensource.com; Wed, 05 Dec 2007 06:36:18 +0000 Received: from [70.42.232.5] (helo=spam.xensource.com) by lists.xensource.com with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1IznrS-0005rR-F0 for xen-users@lists.xensource.com; Wed, 05 Dec 2007 06:36:16 +0000 X-ASG-Debug-ID: 1196836499-0c4600130000-xM1yvO X-Barracuda-URL: http://spam.xensource.com:8000/cgi-bin/mark.cgi X-Barracuda-Connect: mx1.redhat.com[66.187.233.31] X-Barracuda-Start-Time: 1196836499 Received: from mx1.redhat.com (mx1.redhat.com [66.187.233.31]) by spam.xensource.com (Spam Firewall) with ESMTP id 5F97734612 for ; Tue, 4 Dec 2007 22:34:59 -0800 (PST) Received: from int-mx1.corp.redhat.com (int-mx1.corp.redhat.com [172.16.52.254]) by mx1.redhat.com (8.13.8/8.13.1) with ESMTP id lB56YwDL012855; Wed, 5 Dec 2007 01:34:58 -0500 Received: from pobox.corp.redhat.com (pobox.corp.redhat.com [10.11.255.20]) by int-mx1.corp.redhat.com (8.13.1/8.13.1) with ESMTP id lB56Ywkw011569; Wed, 5 Dec 2007 01:34:58 -0500 Received: from sputhenp.pnq.redhat.com (dhcp6-56.pnq.redhat.com [10.65.6.56]) by pobox.corp.redhat.com (8.13.1/8.13.1) with ESMTP id lB56Yu0a015532; Wed, 5 Dec 2007 01:34:56 -0500 Message-ID: <4756468F.7030202@redhat.com> Date: Wed, 05 Dec 2007 12:04:55 +0530 From: Sadique Puthen User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.6 (X11/20070926) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Steven X-ASG-Orig-Subj: Re: [Xen-users] what the H is this virbr0? References: <47558B9B.6000402@savetimehosting.com> In-Reply-To: <47558B9B.6000402@savetimehosting.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Barracuda-Virus-Scanned: by Barracuda Spam Firewall at xensource.com X-Barracuda-Spam-Score: 0.00 X-Barracuda-Spam-Status: No, SCORE=0.00 using per-user scores of TAG_LEVEL=3.5 QUARANTINE_LEVEL=6.0 KILL_LEVEL=1000.0 tests= X-Barracuda-Spam-Report: Code version 3.1, rules version 3.1.35745 Rule breakdown below pts rule name description ---- ---------------------- -------------------------------------------------- X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 70.42.232.5 X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: sputhenp@redhat.com X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.1.0 (2005-09-13) on (none) X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.1 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00 autolearn=ham version=3.1.0 Subject: Re: [Xen-users] what the H is this virbr0? X-SA-Exim-Version: 4.2.1 (built Mon, 27 Mar 2006 13:42:28 +0200) X-SA-Exim-Scanned: Yes (on lists.xensource.com) Cc: xen-users X-BeenThere: xen-users@lists.xensource.com X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Xen user discussion List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: xen-users-bounces@lists.xensource.com Errors-To: xen-users-bounces@lists.xensource.com Steven wrote: > Hi, > > I just tested in the lab the new CentOS 5.1 Xen and find out it breaks > network connectivity, at least in my setup. > It seems it is somehow making use of the 3.1 Xen version (altought I > am not sure about that) but whatever changes it introduce is not > documented at the location one would expect, the obvious new thing (at > least for me) is this thing I will call out of guessing a virtual > bridge, when I do an ifconfig on the dom0: > > virbr0 Link encap:Ethernet HWaddr FE:FF:FF:FF:FF:FF > inet addr:192.168.122.1 Bcast:192.168.122.255 > This seems to change everything with regard to networking. I googgled > a bit and read the following links but I could not find any > explanation about what it is, what it does and why it breaks my setup: Centos 5.1 makes networking for guests a bit easier by adding virb0 and implementing a natted network connection for guests. This shouldn't break the networking that you had previously in Centos-5.0. At least it has not broken anything on my RHEL5 system when I upgraded that to RHEL-5.1 RHEL-5.1 makes it possible for you to put guests in a private network behind dom0 and nat packets to your LAN through dom0. This is the preferred set up for laptops. If you create guests using virt-manager, it defaults the network setup to use natting, unless you explicitly select to bridge the network to xenbrx. The problem is that RHEL-5.1 does not enable ip forwarding by default in the kernel. So if you create guests and bridge them to virbr0, the guest wouldn't be able to communicate to the external networks. This can simply be solved by enabling ip forwarding in Dom0. --Sadique > > http://wiki.xensource.com/xenwiki/XenNetworking > http://www.cl.cam.ac.uk/research/srg/netos/xen/readmes/user/user.html#SECTION03220000000000000000 > > > Can anyone point to an official information source for this beast? > > Regards, > _______________________________________________ Xen-users mailing list Xen-users@lists.xensource.com http://lists.xensource.com/xen-users