Good afternoon Dietmar,
The reason is separation of client's resources on the machine(s).
In firewalling, it is not uncommon to use a lot of VLAN's.
For example at one of my clients that I do consultancy for, they have
more than 60 VLAN's defined on their firewall.
For my the setup is like t
> If it would be possible to provide a 'trunk' openvswitch interface to
> the CT, then from within the CT vlan devices could be setup from the
> trunk, but in the end that will still create 10+ interfaces in the
> container itself.
Cant you simply use a single network interface, then configure
Hi Dietmar,
As said, the node has tradtional vmbr (brctl) bridges. So with that
setup, I do not know how to do what you suggest. But I am happy to learn.
And as far as I can tell on my test server that uses openvswitch, I can
only assign one tag to an interface in a container.
So also that
Hi Dietmar,
I have done some more testing on my openvswitch test proxmox system.
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.
Which they are not. So, in order to solve this I have to migrate the
Am Sonntag, den 23.08.2020, 12:58 +0200 schrieb Stephan Leemburg:
> Good afternoon Dietmar,
>
> The reason is separation of client's resources on the machine(s).
>
> In firewalling, it is not uncommon to use a lot of VLAN's.
>
> For example at one of my clients that I do consultancy for, they
>
Am Sonntag, den 23.08.2020, 12:58 +0200 schrieb Stephan Leemburg:
Good afternoon Dietmar,
The reason is separation of client's resources on the machine(s).
In firewalling, it is not uncommon to use a lot of VLAN's.
For example at one of my clients that I do consultancy for, they
have
more than
> 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.
___
