On 02/05/13 17:32, steve_1...@hushmail.com wrote:
> On Thu, May 2, 2013 at 11:17 AM, Roger Pau Monné wrote:
>> On 02/05/13 17:09, agya naila wrote:
>>> Does any one have test this script performance with Xen live migration?
>>> what is the performance result compared
On 02/05/13 17:09, agya naila wrote:
> Does any one have test this script performance with Xen live migration?
> what is the performance result compared with brctl. I hope any body want
> to share it. I want to use this script with my Xen 4.2.1 using xend/xm
> toostack.
I have not tried it myself,
LAN][:TRUNK:TRUNK]
>
> e.g.
> - xenbr0.99
> add the VIF to VLAN99 on xenbr0
> - xenbr0:99:100:101
> add the VIF to xenbr0 as a trunk port receiving VLANs 99, 100 & 101
>
> Signed-off-by: Ian Campbell
> Signed-off-by: Bastian Blank
Acked-by: Roger Pau Monné
On 23/04/13 10:22, Ian Campbell wrote:
> Based on Waldi's RFC at
> http://lists.xen.org/archives/html/xen-devel/2012-09/msg00943.html
>
> To use it set vif.default.script="vif-openvswitch" in /etc/xen/xl.conf or use
> script=vif-openvswitch in the vif configuration.
>
> Appears to do the right th
On 23/04/13 10:22, Ian Campbell wrote:
> Based on Waldi's RFC at
> http://lists.xen.org/archives/html/xen-devel/2012-09/msg00943.html
>
> To use it set vif.default.script="vif-openvswitch" in /etc/xen/xl.conf or use
> script=vif-openvswitch in the vif configuration.
>
> Appears to do the right th
On 22/04/13 19:05, Ian Campbell wrote:
> On Mon, 2013-04-22 at 17:46 +0100, Roger Pau Monne wrote:
>>> +offline)
>>
>> Don't you need a "remove" here?
>>
>> remove|offline)
>> ...
>>
>> Or it doesn't matter because when the tap device is destroyed everything
>> is automagically cleaned?
>
On 22/04/13 14:36, Ian Campbell wrote:
> Based on Waldi's RFC at
> http://lists.xen.org/archives/html/xen-devel/2012-09/msg00943.html
>
> To use it set vif.default.script="vif-openvswitch" in /etc/xen/xl.conf or use
> script=vif-openvswitch in the vif configuration.
>
> Appears to do the right th
