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

Re: [libvirt] Networking options in libvirt_lxc



Hello,

Thank you for the fast and detailed clarifications! I have some more questions, please find them inline.

Best regards,
Bogdan P.


> -----Original Message-----
> From: Daniel P. Berrange [mailto:berrange redhat com]
> Sent: Wednesday, April 03, 2013 1:12 PM
> To: Purcareata Bogdan-B43198
> Cc: libvir-list redhat com
> Subject: Re: [libvirt] Networking options in libvirt_lxc
> 
> On Wed, Apr 03, 2013 at 10:04:20AM +0000, Purcareata Bogdan-B43198 wrote:
> > Hello,
> >
> > I am doing some research on [subject] and I would like to find out some information regarding
> various scenarios. I've studied the official documentation at [1] and some of the mailing list
> archives. The configurations I have in mind are somewhat inspired by what the sf LXC package offers in
> terms of networking.
> >
> > What I've tested so far and works:
> > - Shared networking - all host interfaces are present in the container if no <interface> tag has
> been specified in the domain configuration. I'm assuming this is because the container is started in
> the same network namespace like the host. Is it possible to make only a subset of these interfaces
> visible inside the container?
> 
> Yes, if no <interface> is listed, we do not enable network namespaces.
> You can force network namespaces by setting
> 
>   <features>
>     <privnet/>
>   </features>
> 
> which will mean all you get is a loopback device.
> 
> If you need to make a subset of host interfaces visible, you'd need to
> use <privnet/> and then the (not yet implemented) <hostdev> mode you
> describe at the end.
> 
> > - Bridge to LAN - connecting a domain interface to a host bridge;
> > - Direct attachment through a Macvtap device - all 3 modes (vepa, bridge and private) work as
> expected, "passthrough" requires some capabilities in the physical device (SRIOV), which I don't have
> - assuming I have a device with this capability, is this configuration supported by (implemented in)
> the libvirt_lxc driver?
> 
> You don't need SRIOV for mode='passthrough' - it works with any host nic.
> SRIOV just makes it more useful if you need to run lots of guests and each
> needs its own NIC, since with mode='passthough' you have a 1:1 mapping between
> NICS & guests, whereas with the other macvtap modes you have a 1:N mapping.

I'm not very familiar with how this works, but I managed to achieve something: I connected an interface with type=direct and mode=passthrough to a container domain - starting the domain only worked if the host interface was down. I assigned the same IP address inside the container and ping worked with the outside network. However, ping no longer works from the host device to the outside. Also, I can't start more than one container in this mode for the same interface - and I assume this is because of the 1:1 mapping between NICs and guests that you mentioned. I understand that SRIOV would be useful because it would expose more VFs, so that more guests can connect in this mode to the same device.

So I am assuming that the container interface becomes the functional "endpoint", and the host interface will further be used just to inspect all the traffic that passes through it. Is my understanding correct? I'm not very familiar with low-level networking, but I am very interested in finding out the exact behavior of this scenario.

> 
> > What other scenarios I would be interested in:
> > - host network interface private to the container - much like what lxc.network.phys is offering:
> "dedicated NIC from host passed through". I've read some documentation about <hostdev> and how to
> assign PCI devices to virtual machine, but I understand this is only possible with KVM - it's assigned
> from the kernel, it makes more sense, etc. However, I've also read a thread on the mailing list
> regarding <hostdev mode="capabilities">, which offers access from a container to a device, but it's
> currenly only applicable to block and character devices. Is there currently any way to make a host
> interface private to a container?
> 
> That isn't currently support, but we could easily wire that up with
> <hostdev mode='capabilities'>. It just requires a simple API call
> to move the host NIC to the containers' namespace

I am not familiar with the libvirt code, but I could take a wild shot at trying to do something about this, if you find it relevant.

> 
> 
> Daniel
> --
> |: http://berrange.com      -o-    http://www.flickr.com/photos/dberrange/ :|
> |: http://libvirt.org              -o-             http://virt-manager.org :|
> |: http://autobuild.org       -o-         http://search.cpan.org/~danberr/ :|
> |: http://entangle-photo.org       -o-       http://live.gnome.org/gtk-vnc :|



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