Greg has made some excellent explanation and answers. I wanted to comment on a few other things. Ross Boylan wrote: > My wireless router is currently serving as a dhcp server; it has a reserved > IP for the system under discussion. Okay. That will work. I don't prefer it for a serious server configuration though. Mostly because it uses the new event driven route through the scripts and some traditional server software (nis/yp for example) hasn't fully caught up to this yet. And because it means that two systems, the dhcp server and the dhcp client, are now tangled together in order for everything to be functioning correctly. But in general it should work okay. > This is not the long-run plan. The router keeps flaking out, > perhaps in part because of some interaction with the bridging: The router should not care that you are using a bridge on your client or not. Using a bridge on your system shoulid not cause your router problems. > I've had 2 or 3 problems since I started the bridging, and none > since I took it down. I solve them by power cycling the router; I > haven't diagnosed them further. Strange. I think you router problems are either something unrelated there or a misdiagnosis on your system. > That configuration did not work after a system restart: no packets > traveled to outside networks. I can see that something was broken. But that doesn't mean that network bridges don't work. Just that you haven't used a working configuration yet. > As to " why you tap as bridge port intend of eth2?" I don't understand the > question, even reading "intend" as "instead". But basically I was just > copying a configuration and had no deep reason. Sorry for the typo. Yes you read it correctly. I think Greg jumped into that one with good explanation so I will leave it there. > Arun made a suggestion that > > Your 'physical' device eth0/eth2 or whatever needs to be added to the > bridge. > I believe that is done by the /etc/kvm/kvm-ifup script that is executed > when I launch the virtual machine. I think that file must have been removed at some point. I have the qemu-kvm package (which owns that file) installed but do not have that file on my system. The qemu-kvm.postinst script in the current package removes the conffile. So just a note that the file doesn't exist in recent versions. > One thing I struggled with was that qemu-kvm, via the /etc/kvm/kvm-ifup > script I mentioned above, does some stuff automatically. Help that is > written without that in mind tends to include instructions that either > duplicate or, perhaps, are at cross-purposes with it. And since that file was removed I assume it was problematic for others as well. Bob
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature