From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1ELhxk-0000e7-Ka for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Sat, 01 Oct 2005 10:03:40 -0400 Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1ELhxg-0000bM-0r for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Sat, 01 Oct 2005 10:03:37 -0400 Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1ELhxe-0000TG-F9 for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Sat, 01 Oct 2005 10:03:35 -0400 Received: from [65.74.133.11] (helo=mail.codesourcery.com) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (TLS-1.0:DHE_RSA_3DES_EDE_CBC_SHA:24) (Exim 4.34) id 1ELhla-0004O9-Jr for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Sat, 01 Oct 2005 09:51:07 -0400 From: Paul Brook Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] tun/tap networking Date: Sat, 1 Oct 2005 14:50:59 +0100 References: <20050930221321.C7BED31C14@ravel.n2.net> <433E733E.9000209@gmx.de> <20051001130712.GA28444@jbrown.mylinuxbox.org> In-Reply-To: <20051001130712.GA28444@jbrown.mylinuxbox.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: <200510011451.02757.paul@codesourcery.com> Reply-To: qemu-devel@nongnu.org List-Id: qemu-devel.nongnu.org List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: qemu-devel@nongnu.org Cc: "Jim C. Brown" On Saturday 01 October 2005 14:07, Jim C. Brown wrote: > On Sat, Oct 01, 2005 at 01:30:06PM +0200, Oliver Gerlich wrote: > > That means it would work if the host NIC is connected to a switch? Then > > the switch would send packets from the guest which are meant for the > > host back to the host NIC and everything's fine! Or did I misunderstand > > that now? > > If the switch sends packets from the host NIC back to itself, I believe > that would work. A switch will not send a packet back where it came from. That would be a sure way to introduce infinite forwarding loops. Paul