similar to: Host CPU usage high on guest network load (macvtap).

On Thu, May 14, 2020 at 1:32 PM Laine Stump <laine@redhat.com> wrote: > On 5/13/20 12:52 AM, Subhendu Ghosh wrote: > > Hi > > > > Couple of questions around macvtap direct usage: > > > > 1) is the document here current? > > https://libvirt.org/formatnetwork.html#examplesDirect > > Yes. None of that has changed in any major way in many years. >

Hi Couple of questions around macvtap direct usage: 1) is the document here current? https://libvirt.org/formatnetwork.html#examplesDirect I have been able to get host to guest network traffic without any special configuration or switch since Fedora 28 when I first started using it. Using <forward mode=vepa> requires switch port mirroring, but just using <forward mode=bridge>

On 04/30/2015 11:18 AM, Laine Stump wrote: > On 04/30/2015 10:26 AM, Lars Kellogg-Stedman wrote: >> I am running OpenStack inside a libvirt guest that is connected to the >> local network via a macvtap interface. My experience so far suggests >> that a macvtap interface will not pass traffic with a source MAC >> address other than the MAC address of the interface

Greetings, This is my fist time posting to a mailing list. For the past few days I have been trying to mimic my former windows workstation with a centos 6.3 workstation at work. I have gotten really far but am now facing an issue I cant seem to solve on my own. My former workstation had vmware for running my virtual machines. Most of the time I would run just two virtual machines, but sometimes

On 5/13/20 12:52 AM, Subhendu Ghosh wrote: > Hi > > Couple of questions around macvtap direct usage: > > 1) is the document here current? > https://libvirt.org/formatnetwork.html#examplesDirect Yes. None of that has changed in any major way in many years. > > I have been able to get host to guest network traffic without any > special configuration or switch since

On 1/3/19 9:23 AM, Marc Haber wrote: > Hi Laine, > > thanks for your answer, I really appreciate that. > > On Wed, Jan 02, 2019 at 11:34:30AM -0500, Laine Stump wrote: >> On 12/16/18 4:59 PM, Marc Haber wrote: >>> I would like to run a network firewall as a VM on a KVM host. There are >>> ~ 25 VLANs delivered to the KVM host on three dedicated links, no

Hi Laine, thanks for your answer, I really appreciate that. On Wed, Jan 02, 2019 at 11:34:30AM -0500, Laine Stump wrote: > On 12/16/18 4:59 PM, Marc Haber wrote: > > I would like to run a network firewall as a VM on a KVM host. There are > > ~ 25 VLANs delivered to the KVM host on three dedicated links, no LACP > > or other things. I have the VLANs 100-180 on the host's

On 12/16/18 4:59 PM, Marc Haber wrote: > Hi, > > I would like to run a network firewall as a VM on a KVM host. There are > ~ 25 VLANs delivered to the KVM host on three dedicated links, no LACP > or other things. I have the VLANs 100-180 on the host's enp1s0, the VLANs > 200-280 on the host's enp2s0 and the VLANs 300-380 on the host's enp3s0. > > To save

On 3/14/19 4:06 PM, Martin Kletzander wrote: > I cannot try this right now, but I would try something like this: > > ip link add dev veth-vm type veth peer name veth-cont > > and then put veth-vm in the VM (type='direct' would work, but I can > imagine > type='ethernet' might be even faster) and start the containers with > macvtap > using veth-cont. I

On 03/20/2016 08:51 PM, Devin Reade wrote: > In a CentOS 7 test HA cluster I'm building I want both traditional > services running on the cluster and VMs running on both nodes On a purely subjective note: I think that's a bad design. One of the primary benefits of virtualization and other containers is isolating the applications you run from the base OS. Putting services other

Paul, I also think that bridge may not be the right place for VEPA, but rather a simpler sw/hw mux Although the VEPA support may reside in multiple places (I.e. also in the bridge) As Arnd pointed out Or already added an extension to qemu that allow direct guest virtual NIC mapping to an interface device (vs using tap), this was done specifically to address VEPA, and result in much faster

Paul, I also think that bridge may not be the right place for VEPA, but rather a simpler sw/hw mux Although the VEPA support may reside in multiple places (I.e. also in the bridge) As Arnd pointed out Or already added an extension to qemu that allow direct guest virtual NIC mapping to an interface device (vs using tap), this was done specifically to address VEPA, and result in much faster

Paul, I also think that bridge may not be the right place for VEPA, but rather a simpler sw/hw mux Although the VEPA support may reside in multiple places (I.e. also in the bridge) As Arnd pointed out Or already added an extension to qemu that allow direct guest virtual NIC mapping to an interface device (vs using tap), this was done specifically to address VEPA, and result in much faster

Hi, I would like to run a network firewall as a VM on a KVM host. There are ~ 25 VLANs delivered to the KVM host on three dedicated links, no LACP or other things. I have the VLANs 100-180 on the host's enp1s0, the VLANs 200-280 on the host's enp2s0 and the VLANs 300-380 on the host's enp3s0. To save myself from configuring all VLANs on the KVM host, I'd like to hand the entire

1. Does vepa mode in libvirt use sr-iov ? 2. How can I do port mirroring with sr-iov? vepa This network uses a macvtap "direct" connection in "vepa" mode to connect each guest to the network (this requires that the physical interfaces used be connected to a vepa-capable hardware switch. The physical interface to be used will be picked from among those listed in

I'm looking for some information regarding the interaction of KVM, VLANs, firewalld, and the kernel's forwarding configuration. I would appreciate input especially from anyone already running a similar configuration in production. In short, I'm trying to figure out if a current configuration is inadvertently opening up traffic across network segments. On earlier versions of CentOS

I am running OpenStack inside a libvirt guest that is connected to the local network via a macvtap interface. My experience so far suggests that a macvtap interface will not pass traffic with a source MAC address other than the MAC address of the interface itself...for example, if inside the guest eth0 is attached to a bridge. Is that correct, or is there some setting that will make that work?

I seem to have run into https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=855640, because when I tried the fix/work-around at the end (comment 11), ethtool -K eth0 gro off, my download speed by speedtest went from undetectable to ~150Mb/s. However, it was not able to connect for the upload test, and so something may still be off. Non-virtual machines can do the upload test, so it's not just a

Hi Yalan and Michal, Thank you for your response. So what I understand is that I can change rx_queue size even if I use direct type interface and qemu driver as long as the driver is virtio. Am I right? If that is the case why am I getting the error saying that error: XML document failed to validate against schema: Unable to validate doc against /usr/share/libvirt/schemas/domain.rng Extra

Hi Yalan, In the previous email you mentioned "tx_queue_size='512' will not work in the guest with direct type interface, in fact, no matter what you set, it will not work and guest will get the default '256'. " So if I am using macvtap for my interfaces, then the device type will always be direct type. Does it mean that there is no way I can increase the buffer size