| |
|
 |
|
 |
|
|
|
| |
|
|
xen-users
Re: [Xen-users] routed network (not only one vif needed?) (corrected mai
Hi,
Sueveges Gyoergy schrieb:
Hi
Thnx for the answer.
So do you think I need bridged network?
I have the dom0 (having public IP, and being also part of the private
network) and ths DOMU-s as the subnetwork (192.168.0.x).
I don't understand what will be happened with the network interfaces
at briding:
- There will be an xen-br0 interface created with my DOM0's (public)
IP address
- When starting my DOM1 a mew VIF interface on DOM0 will be created,
but there will be no interface created on DOM1.
What I would except: having one virtual interface on dom0, that all
the domU could see as gateway. On DOMu there should be an
eth0 everywehere where I would set the appropriate IP adresses,
gateways.. So with that I'd have a virtual router on DOM0. Maybe
is this concept worng?
If you had one interface in dom0 that all domU could see, then every
domU could "hear" all the traffic of the other domUs. That would be the
opposite of security.
Thus you have a virtual interface for every domU in dom0 (which is the
pseudo real interface inside domU). When there is traffic (lets say,
between domU1 and domU2), then dom0 connects those two virtual
interfaces using the bridge.
Someone somewhere said the bridge is like a crossover cable between two
doms, and every pair of doms has its own crossover cable. And all these
crossover cables together form the bridge.
How schould I live with the interfaces created by xen bridge scripts
in this case?
I am sorry, George, I do not understand the question. What is the
problem with these interfaces?
Dirk
Thnx
George
On Tue, 25 Oct 2005 21:00:56 +0200, Dirk H. Schulz
<dirk.schulz@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Hi Georg,
georg@xxxxxxxxxxxx schrieb:
Hi!
Now I tried to set up xen for routed network. I didn't understand why so
much vifs will be create, as much as domains I have.
My routed network consists of the domain0 (with public IP), and
domainU-s as the subnetwork (192.168.0.x)
So I modified the vif-route script in order to have only one vif for all
domainsU-s (with ip 192.168.0.254). But in this case only the domainU
works, for that I created the vif. So I need more VIF in order to have
networking also in all my DomainU-s? all of these Vifs should have the
same IP address.
Why should that make sense? I do not see what you are after with this.
Routed networking implies that every domU is a subnet of its own, so
it has to have an address space (not only a single address)
of its own. Dom0 has to have a routing table that connects the dom0
NIC with the the virtual subnets that the domUs are.
(My subdomains are in one private network (192.168.0.1))
Why don't you use bridging, then?
Dirk
_______________________________________________
Xen-users mailing list
Xen-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-users
--
Using Opera's revolutionary e-mail client: http://www.opera.com/m2/
_______________________________________________
_______________________________________________
Xen-users mailing list
Xen-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-users
|
|
|
| |
|
Home