On 24 April 2015 at 18:00, Laine Stump <la...@laine.org> wrote: > (in before Eric for this :-) Please don't top-post in responses on this > list (or most other technical lists). Posting your responses in the context > of the previous message makes it much easier for followups that want to > respond to points from several messages at once (and also makes it easier > to understand the discussion by reading just one of those messages). > > On 04/24/2015 11:08 AM, mimic...@gmail.com wrote: > > HI Michal > > > Thank you for explaining. I have this situation in a number of > production servers where we would always use static IPs for the host and > VMs. In such case we have no requirement for NATed network in the future. > And we we ever do, we can rely on a DHCP server within the LAN to provide > IPs to the VMs. > > I'll look to remove both libivirt-daemon-driver-network, > libvirt-daemon-driver-network > and dnsmasq. > > > You can't remove libvirt-daemon-driver-network, as > libvirt-daemon-driver-qemu is dependent on it (for very good reasons). If > you try to do this, you will almost surely end up with a crashing libvirtd. > > > > Any further thought from your side? > > > > > On 24 April 2015 at 13:12, Michal Privoznik <mpriv...@redhat.com> wrote: > >> On 24.04.2015 12 <24.04.2015%2012>:45, mimic...@gmail.com wrote: >> > I am running KVM virtualization with libvirtd (libvirt) 0.10.2 in >> bridged >> > network mode, however I still have the default virtual network >> > bridge/interfaces and dnsmasq on the host. What I am trying to >> understand >> > is whether or not dnsmasq and the virtual network (*virbr0, Vnet0 and >> Vnet1*) >> > still play any role. If not, can I remove them? >> > > You are mixing together a couple differnet (but related) things. virbr0 is > a bridge device created for libvirt's "default" virtual network, and the > dnsmasq instance that is running is also run by libvirt for that network. > However, the vnet0 and vnet1 devices are tap devices; one of these is > created for each domain interface, whether you use libvirt's network or you > connect to a host bridge that you've configured yourself - you can't > eliminate those devices. > > >> Yes, you can safely remove libvirt-daemon-config-network package. It >> should disable the default network. > > > Actually that won't disable any already-installed default network. You'll > need to do this: > > virsh net-destroy default > virsh net-undefine default > > Once you've done this, the virbr0 device will no longer appear, and > dnsmasq will not be run (although the binary will still be present on the > disk). > > However, dropping dnsmasq is a bit >> harder, since libivirt-daemon-driver-network depends on it. We can't >> know whether you will not someday like a NATed network with a DHCP >> server, even though now you don't. However, >> libvirt-daemon-driver-network takes care about all the network types >> known to libvirt, so you can't really drop it (unless forcibly removing >> the package and let the libvirt just deal with it, which I'd discourage >> you from doing anyway). >> > > That's not going to work. There are things in the network driver other > than just libvirt's virtual networks, and qemu isn't setup to deal with the > network driver not being present. > > > The problem of top-posting is from the way reply is composed within Gmail. I'll watch out next time.
Thanks Mimi
_______________________________________________ libvirt-users mailing list libvirt-users@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/libvirt-users
