Re: [libvirt] iptables --physdev-out warnings

From: Eric Blake <eblake(a)redhat.com&gt; To: Reinier Schoof <reinier(a)transip.nl&gt;, Cc: libvir-list(a)redhat.com, Stefan Berger/Watson/IBM@IBMUS Date: 01/16/2013 07:49 PM Subject: Re: [libvirt] iptables --physdev-out warnings On 01/16/2013 03:23 AM, Reinier Schoof wrote: > > I patched the libvirt source (version 1.0.0) to test whether this

> or not: > --- src/nwfilter/nwfilter_ebiptables_driver.c.orig 2013-01-16 > 10:51:43.000000000 +0100 > +++ src/nwfilter/nwfilter_ebiptables_driver.c 2013-01-16 > 10:52:07.000000000 +0100 > @@ -166,7 +166,7 @@ > snprintf(buf, sizeof(buf), "%c%c-%s", prefix[0], prefix[1],

> > #define PHYSDEV_IN "--physdev-in" > -#define PHYSDEV_OUT "--physdev-out" > +#define PHYSDEV_OUT "--physdev-is-bridged --physdev-out" > Thanks for the report, and also for a quick patch attempt. > The warnings in /var/log/messages are gone and running the test again > proved the 100th VM started in 3.8 seconds. It suprises me I'm the

> to mention this problem on the libvirt mailing list and I wondering if > I'm doing something wrong. Until then, this fix helps me a lot! I took a look on RHEL 5.9, to see if --physdev-is-bridged was supported in iptables that old (1.3.5). It appears to be listed there, so you are in luck. It would be nice if you can convert this to a formal git patch submission (see http://libvirt.org/hacking.html); but if you are not comfortable doing that, we can help. I'd like to see if Laine or Stefan have any comments; but if they don't reject this in another day or two, I have no problems going ahead and applying it.