Am 8/24/20 um 6:14 PM schrieb Tom Weber: > Am Montag, den 24.08.2020, 17:49 +0200 schrieb Dietmar Maurer: >>> On 08/24/2020 12:54 PM Stephan Leemburg <sleemb...@it-functions.nl> wrote: >>> On 24-08-2020 06:53, Dietmar Maurer wrote: >>>>> If I don't put a tag on the device, it seems to behave like a >>>>> trunk. So, that would solve my problem. _If_ the hosts where openvswitch >>>>> enabled. >>>> >>>> I am unable to see why you need openvswitch for that? This also >>>> works with standard linux network. >>> >>> Oh, that is new for me. >>> >>> So, I can have a vlan aware traditional bridge in the firewall >>> that >>> receives tagged frames and at the same time have the clients on >>> the >>> specific 'vlans' receive non-tagged frames for their respective >>> pvid? >>> >>> How can this be configured in Proxmox? >> >> You do not not any special config on the pve host if you do all VLAN >> related >> stuff inside the VM. > > You do realize that Stephan is talking about CT not VM? (althought I > don't think such a setup makes sense) >
But it should be also possible to do that with CTs and their veth devices, they can be untagged and act like a trunk interface (and they can to that on one or both side of the veth peers). I found this article which seems to explain the thematic quite well, at least after skimming over it ;-) https://linux-blog.anracom.com/2017/11/20/fun-with-veth-devices-linux-bridges-and-vlans-in-unnamed-linux-network-namespaces-iv/ I applied the increase to the CT NIC limit nonetheless, as it makes sense to have it in sync with VMs. But this use case shouldn't need that increase... cheers, Thomas _______________________________________________ pve-devel mailing list pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com https://lists.proxmox.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pve-devel
