On Wed, 27 Jan 2010, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
.....
>
> The above is not in the domain xml but was proposed in the bridge xml.
>
> The advantage of using the bridge concept is that it appears the same
> for macvlan and the virtual Linux host bridge. The 'macvlan' interface
> itself can support 'bridge' mode in addition to the 'vepa' mode.
>
> Therefore, one is creating the bridge, attaching it to the physical
> device. This device is the one which provides the 'uplink' i.e. is
> either the sr-iov card or is the device associated with the macvlan driver.
> The domain xml can now point to the above bridge. For the interfaces it
> creates it can associate target names.
The main issue with this, is that when using VEPA/macvlan there's
no actual host device being created as there is when using the
linux software bridge. The <interface> descriptions here are mapped
straight into the /etc/sysconfig/networking-scripts/ifcfg-XXX files
that trigger creation & setup of the physical, bridge, bonding & vlan
interfaces. Since there is no actual bridge interface, there's no
ifcfg-XXX to map onto in the VEPA case.
ok, thanks for this clarification. We can use the similar setup using a
different construct - maybe physical or direct.
Vivek
Daniel
--
|: Red Hat, Engineering, London -o-
http://people.redhat.com/berrange/ :|
|:
http://libvirt.org -o-
http://virt-manager.org -o-
http://ovirt.org :|
|:
http://autobuild.org -o-
http://search.cpan.org/~danberr/ :|
|: GnuPG: 7D3B9505 -o- F3C9 553F A1DA 4AC2 5648 23C1 B3DF F742 7D3B 9505 :|
__
Vivek Kashyap
Linux Technology Center, IBM