similar to: Do not attempt to add physical NIC to virbr0

Hi , I have two virtual machines VM1 and VM2. Then I have added eth0 of my VM to 'default' network. Use case :- I want to monitor all traffic on virbr0('default' network). Steps followed :- 1. Add VM1 eth0 to virbr0 2. Add VM2 eth1 to virbr0 3. brctl setageing ovsbr0 0 ..(To put bridge in promiscuous) Now I am running tcpdump on eth1 of VM2 and trying to ping

Hi Michal, Ok. Please can you try this scenario once you get free time. Currently my hypervisor is Ubuntu 14.04 LTS 3.13.0-24-generic. Meanwhile I will try this with some other Linux kernel also. Mail me if you find anything related to this. It will be helpful. Thanks for reply. Regards, Sagar On Mon, Nov 24, 2014 at 3:58 PM, Michal Privoznik <mprivozn@redhat.com> wrote: > On

On 11/12/2014 08:21 AM, Sagar Shedge wrote: > Hi, > > I got this NOTE on most of the link. But I am not getting reason for this. > Why someone should not add physical NIC to virbr0. Well, for a start, if you do that then the dhcp server that is running on virbr0 will be exposed to the physical network and begin answering DHCP requests from devices out in the real world. And then you

On Tue, Jun 20, 2017 at 10:05:19AM +0200, Martin Kletzander wrote: >On Tue, Jun 20, 2017 at 02:26:59AM -0400, Travis S. Johnson wrote: >>Hello, >> >>I came across an interesting problem in my home lab a few weeks ago as I'm >>prepping for my RHCE exam using Michael Jang study guide. I've been at this >>for days now, and I still can't wrap my head around

On 12.11.2014 14:55, Sagar Shedge wrote: > Hi , > > > I have two virtual machines VM1 and VM2. Then I have added eth0 of my > VM to 'default' network. > > Use case :- > I want to monitor all traffic on virbr0('default' network). > > Steps followed :- > 1. Add VM1 eth0 to virbr0 > 2. Add VM2 eth1 to virbr0 > 3. brctl setageing ovsbr0 0 ..(To

On 24.11.2014 13:51, Sagar Shedge wrote: > Hi Michal, > > Ok. > > Please can you try this scenario once you get free time. Currently my > hypervisor is Ubuntu 14.04 LTS 3.13.0-24-generic. > Meanwhile I will try this with some other Linux kernel also. > > Mail me if you find anything related to this. It will be helpful. > Thanks for reply. I don't think other

Hi all, I want to set the advertised value of MTU for virbr0 interface on a Fedora 21 host to 1454 to accommodate the installation of new VMs for testing purposes. The aforementioned host is an OpenStack VM actually, which explains the need for a lower than 1500 MTU. I noticed Pieter Hollants' patch to set dhcp-option=<number>,"<value>" for an interface, but

I need some help in understanding libvirt's virtual networking. I have configured bridged networking (shared physical device) on libvirt+KVM system which is working fine. Also, I am using default NAT network on with virbr0 bridge device and virbr0-nic. I would like to get better understanding on virbr0-nic works in this virtual network configuration. I understand that traffic from virbr0

Hello, I've created a routed network that forwards to a physical interface: <network> <name>default</name> <forward dev='eth0' mode='route'/> <mac address='52:54:00:f2:5b:4f'/> <ip address='192.168.100.1' netmask='255.255.255.0'> <dhcp> <range start='192.168.100.10'

On 08/06/2013 06:38 PM, Jorge Fábregas wrote: > On 07/31/2013 11:01 AM, Jorge Fábregas wrote: >> That is, the first network can reach all other networks (just because it >> happens to be the first one defined). Is this the intention (only >> default can talk to the others but not the other way around)? > *Bump* > > I found this excellent post by Daniel Berrange: >

On Fri, 2016-05-06 at 07:41 -0400, Laine Stump wrote: > On 05/04/2016 08:40 AM, lejeczek wrote: > > > hi users > > > > > > I have my dhcpd to serve nothing but virbr0 (libvirt), OS is Centos > > 7.2 > > Dhcpd would not start, complaining like this: > > >   > Is virbr0 created by libvirt as part of one of its "virtual >

in my case each ethernet must in UP status even it is a NAT network where is the point i can start its virt-ethernet when i start a NAT-network? thanks -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://listman.redhat.com/archives/libvirt-users/attachments/20130415/f6f464d6/attachment.htm>

HI Michal Thank you for explaining. I have this situation in a number of production servers where we would always use static IPs for the host and VMs. In such case we have no requirement for NATed network in the future. And we we ever do, we can rely on a DHCP server within the LAN to provide IPs to the VMs. I'll look to remove both libivirt-daemon-driver-network,

On Wed, Mar 9, 2016 at 2:49 PM, Andrea Bolognani <abologna@redhat.com> wrote: > On Wed, 2016-03-09 at 14:15 +0000, Andrei Perietanu wrote: > > I am building a custom Linux image which includes KVM and will be > installed on multiple machines. By default when > > installing libvirt you get a 'default network' which adds a 'vrbr0'. > > I found several

On 12/16/2013 04:47 AM, Gao feng wrote: > On 12/14/2013 10:51 AM, scar wrote: >> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- >> Hash: SHA256 >> >> Gao feng @ 12/12/2013 10:18 PM: >>> I saw there are two bridge br0 and virbr0 in your host. which >>> bridge the libvirt uses? what's result of #virsh net-list ? >> well i don't quite understand bridges

Hello, I came across an interesting problem in my home lab a few weeks ago as I'm prepping for my RHCE exam using Michael Jang study guide. I've been at this for days now, and I still can't wrap my head around how two or more virtual networks in default NAT configuration are even allowed to communicate with each other despite what the libvirt documentation said. Here's the

Interested in bonding my 2 on board nics along with my add on card NIC for a total of 3. How would this work with the virtual machines? My eths/IPs ---> bond0, bond0:1, etc ---> ? ----> virbr0,virbr0:1 (each machine to have own IP address, one machine may have some virtual sites needing more than one ip, so multiple ips added to mix..) add something to the bond0 file, or just leave

On 08/13/2013 07:07 AM, Jorge Fábregas wrote: > On 08/13/2013 06:31 AM, Laine Stump wrote: >> Correct. That is a known problem since 2008: >> >> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=453580 > Thanks Laine for confirming it is a known issue. I googled it a lot but > couldn't find that bugzilla entry. > > Do you know if this is still the case with the

hi everybody my mind must have gone blank & eyes blind, I'm hoping it's simple and somebody can shed the light on bit I cannot see. a regular default net: <network> <name>default</name> <uuid>4c0a0c44-7e8a-493b-a57c-87cd38eaa0f7</uuid> <forward mode='nat'/> <bridge name='virbr0' stp='on'

At work I have a script that provisions a vm for use by employees. One step in this process is to fetch hadoop, which we happen to get from cloudera. I noticed the script always failed when I used libvirt's default networking (nat) but worked fine when I used user mode networking. My instinct is that this is related to (potentially uncommon) network traffic from the server in question, and