Hi Daniel, On Sat, Apr 15, 2017 at 10:50:30AM +0200, Daniel Pocock wrote:
> With VirtualBox dropping out of testing[1], more people will be using > KVM and libvirt/virt-manager[2] for desktop virtualization. IMHO it was not in testing for quite some time, as it was gone from main to contrib. But YMMV :) > With VirtualBox, it was possible for people to bridge their physical > network interfaces with their VM guest systems using the GUI / setup wizard. > > With libvirt, that is possible using macvtap but it is unreliable and > doesn't allow[3] communication between the guest and the host, only > between the guest and other hosts on the subnet. Doesn't libvirt create a virbr0 bridge upon installation? At least all my setups have that, and it is perfect for my needs: * host can talk to the guests * guests can talk to the host * guests can get to "the internet" due to NAT setup by libvirt The setup should look someting like this: # virsh net-dumpxml default <network> <name>default</name> <uuid>ffa97f93-f2bf-449e-9a3b-84a628367afb</uuid> <forward mode='nat'> <nat> <port start='1024' end='65535'/> </nat> </forward> <bridge name='virbr0' stp='on' delay='0'/> <mac address='52:54:00:66:1e:09'/> <ip address='192.168.122.1' netmask='255.255.255.0'> <dhcp> <range start='192.168.122.2' end='192.168.122.254'/> </dhcp> </ip> </network> > The solution is for people to configure a bridge or Open vSwitch (OVS) > in /etc/network/interfaces. (Notice OVS can be configured[4] in the > interfaces file). Maybe it would be useful to offer one or both of > these options at install time, or even configure a standard (non-OVS) > bridge by default in case the user decides to try KVM in future? IMHO the above implements option 1? > Are there other use cases apart from KVM that would benefit from this? I also use LXC on the same bridge, just for the fact that it is already set up and provides DHCP, DNS and NAT. Cheers Evgeni