From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Goetz Bock <bock@blacknet.de>
Subject: connecting dom0 directly to the bridge (was:
	performance problems...)
Date: Thu, 12 Jan 2006 13:32:01 +0100
Message-ID: <20060112123201.GT4735@shell.blacknet.de>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Return-path: <xen-devel-bounces@lists.xensource.com>
Content-Disposition: inline
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.xensource.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>,
	<mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Post: <mailto:xen-devel@lists.xensource.com>
List-Help: <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.xensource.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>,
	<mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=subscribe>
Sender: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xensource.com
Errors-To: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xensource.com
To: Xen-devel@lists.xensource.com
List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org


On Thu, Jan 12 '06 at 12:24, Ian Pratt wrote:
> You haven't connected dom0 directly to the bridge rather than vif0.0
> to the bridge have you?
I've been doing that with xen 2.0 and xen 3.0.0, what's bad about doing
this?
--  
/"\ Goetz Bock at blacknet dot de  --  secure mobile Linux everNETting
\ /       (c) 2006 Creative Commons, Attribution-ShareAlike 2.0 de
 X   [ 1. Use descriptive subjects - 2. Edit a reply for brevity -  ]
/ \  [ 3. Reply to the list - 4. Read the archive *before* you post ]