On Mon, 2013-04-22 at 18:20 +0100, Roger Pau Monne wrote:
> 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
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 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?
Even if that were the case I wouldn't want to
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
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 thing for PV and HVM guests (including tap devices)
and
