Re: [Qemu-devel] bug reports and suggestions

From: "Jim C. Brown" <jma5@umd.edu>
To: Oliver Gerlich <olig9@gmx.de>
Cc: qemu-devel@nongnu.org
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] bug reports and suggestions
Date: Mon, 8 May 2006 13:28:41 -0400	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20060508172841.GA28661@jbrown.mylinuxbox.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <445F7A4F.1080007@gmx.de>

On Mon, May 08, 2006 at 07:05:19PM +0200, Oliver Gerlich wrote:
> > Currently I'm working on a version that doesn't require a kernel module to
> > do this - it will have the limitation of only supporting tcp/ip packets when
> > talking between host/guest.
> 
> Are you sure that limitation is not too "heavy"? How would eg. UDP, ICMP
> or Multicast DNS work with the non-kernel-solution? And wouldn't an
> ethernet-level emulation be cleaner and also easier to explain to other
> users?

Bleh, sorry, I meant IP. It will theoretically support UDP, ICMP, etc
(as long as it's encapsulated within an IP packet  it should work). I'm
primarily testing with TCP/IP.

Ethernet-level emulation is significantly cleaner but it will not work without
either kernel patches or a kernel module. I'm looking for a 100% user space
solution.

> 
> >>Another interesting thing concerning networking: I use a little script
> >>to set up a bridge between eth0 and tap0; but I have give the new bridge
> >>interface (eg. br0) an IP address and such stuff, because eth0 doesn't
> >>work. This is with Linux 2.6, but I read that with Linux 2.4 it was not
> >>necessary to configure br0, as eth0 would still be accessible. Does
> >>anyone know why this changed? I think it would be much easier if an
> >>interface used in a bridge was still usable.
> > 
> > 
> > eth0 is still usable. It is just slightly cleaner to use br0 directly.
> 
> This is what I tried:
> 
> brctl addbr br0
> brctl addif br0 eth0
> 
> After this, a ping to the IP of eth0 (192.168.0.10) still worked. But a
> ping to the gateway (192.168.0.1) didn't. Running `ifconfig br0 up`
> didn't help either. Do you have a hint how to make this work?
> 

What do your routing tables look like right before and right after you
run those two commands?

> 
> Thanks,
> Oliver
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Version: GnuPG v1.4.3 (GNU/Linux)
> 
> iD8DBQFEX3pLTFOM6DcNJ6cRAsTuAKCvN0b68WV/dFsznXWhv+tfaxvZZgCfdYLp
> VKEpNiUYKchHgRswHIL/BGo=
> =cTW3
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Qemu-devel mailing list
> Qemu-devel@nongnu.org
> http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/qemu-devel
> 

-- 
Infinite complexity begets infinite beauty.
Infinite precision begets infinite perfection.