[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Bridging eth0/br0 & NetworkManager - can they coexist?



On Fri, 29 Jun 2012 16:08:26 +0100, Steve Dowe wrote:

> On 29/06/12 15:34, Camaleón wrote:

>> Mmm... and what's what you want to bridge? Remember that any bridge
>> needs at least two end points.
> 
> My intention is allow my ethernet interface to be allocated as many IPs
> on my local network as necessary to service the virtual machines I'm
> running.  The "bridge", in this case, is a virtual-to-physical one.

Ah, then maybe you don't need a bridge but a virtual addressing layout:

http://wiki.debian.org/NetworkConfiguration#Multiple_IP_addresses_on_One_Interface

>> There are some bridging samples here:
>> 
>> http://wiki.debian.org/BridgeNetworkConnections#Configuring_bridging_in_.2BAC8-etc.2BAC8-network.2BAC8-interfaces
> 
> Thanks. I did look at those.  And by following that configuration:
> 
>  # Set up interfaces manually, avoiding conflicts with, e.g., network
> manager
>  iface eth0 inet manual
> 
>  iface eth1 inet manual
> 
>  # Bridge setup
>  iface br0 inet dhcp
>         bridge_ports eth0
          ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

(you still need a second interface to create the bridge)

> ... Network Manager cannot control eth0.  Under "Wired Networks" it
> reports "Device not managed".

Yes, that's correct.

Why do you want N-M to be in charge of your network? It does not look
like a good approach if you are planning to use Debian as a VM host :-?

> Besides, the comment in that configuration is "# Set up interfaces
> manually, avoiding conflicts with, e.g., network manager" - so it's
> clearly acknowledge here that bridging does indeed conflict with network
> manager, and I shouldn't expect it to work using that example.

It's not that clear, at least from a practical point of view :-)

My experience tells me that I better do not mix them.

>> But shouldn't be better to use the same networking method (ifup or N-M
>> but not a mix of them) to configure the interfaces (eth0 and br0)? :-?
> 
> Ok, so I'm getting used to the Debian way of doing things, having come
> from another distro.  I assumed I /was/ using the N-M way of doing
> things, editing a N-M config file.  But, I glean from your comment that
> there is overlap here.
> 
> When I keep the above settings in /etc/network/interfaces and change
> /etc/NetworkManager/NetworkManager.conf, from
> 
> [ifupdown] managed=false
> 
> to
> 
> [ifupdown] managed=true
> 
> then I can control eth0 through Network Manager, and I'm back at square
> one - both eth0 and br0 get the same IP address, and routing breaks.
> 
> I believe harmony is possible between NM and br0 - I'm just unsure of
> the approach in Debian.

I think you still need to add a second interface to the bridge...

Greetings,

-- 
Camaleón


Reply to: