On Fri, 29 Jun 2012 16:08:26 +0100, Steve Dowe wrote: > On 29/06/12 15:34, Camaleón wrote:
>> Mmm... and what's what you want to bridge? Remember that any bridge >> needs at least two end points. > > My intention is allow my ethernet interface to be allocated as many IPs > on my local network as necessary to service the virtual machines I'm > running. The "bridge", in this case, is a virtual-to-physical one. Ah, then maybe you don't need a bridge but a virtual addressing layout: http://wiki.debian.org/NetworkConfiguration#Multiple_IP_addresses_on_One_Interface >> There are some bridging samples here: >> >> http://wiki.debian.org/BridgeNetworkConnections#Configuring_bridging_in_.2BAC8-etc.2BAC8-network.2BAC8-interfaces > > Thanks. I did look at those. And by following that configuration: > > # Set up interfaces manually, avoiding conflicts with, e.g., network > manager > iface eth0 inet manual > > iface eth1 inet manual > > # Bridge setup > iface br0 inet dhcp > bridge_ports eth0 ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ (you still need a second interface to create the bridge) > ... Network Manager cannot control eth0. Under "Wired Networks" it > reports "Device not managed". Yes, that's correct. Why do you want N-M to be in charge of your network? It does not look like a good approach if you are planning to use Debian as a VM host :-? > Besides, the comment in that configuration is "# Set up interfaces > manually, avoiding conflicts with, e.g., network manager" - so it's > clearly acknowledge here that bridging does indeed conflict with network > manager, and I shouldn't expect it to work using that example. It's not that clear, at least from a practical point of view :-) My experience tells me that I better do not mix them. >> But shouldn't be better to use the same networking method (ifup or N-M >> but not a mix of them) to configure the interfaces (eth0 and br0)? :-? > > Ok, so I'm getting used to the Debian way of doing things, having come > from another distro. I assumed I /was/ using the N-M way of doing > things, editing a N-M config file. But, I glean from your comment that > there is overlap here. > > When I keep the above settings in /etc/network/interfaces and change > /etc/NetworkManager/NetworkManager.conf, from > > [ifupdown] managed=false > > to > > [ifupdown] managed=true > > then I can control eth0 through Network Manager, and I'm back at square > one - both eth0 and br0 get the same IP address, and routing breaks. > > I believe harmony is possible between NM and br0 - I'm just unsure of > the approach in Debian. I think you still need to add a second interface to the bridge... Greetings, -- Camaleón -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/jskj2t$68h$1...@dough.gmane.org
