Date: Mon, 23 Jun 2014 12:20:50 -0700 From: Peter Grehan <grehan@freebsd.org> To: Julian Elischer <julian@freebsd.org> Cc: freebsd-virtualization@freebsd.org Subject: Re: bhyve: vde2/openvswitch Message-ID: <53A87E12.3050201@freebsd.org> In-Reply-To: <53A79CC9.6080005@freebsd.org> References: <alpine.DEB.2.10.1406192041040.12018@melanie> <53A474C7.9030909@freebsd.org> <53A79CC9.6080005@freebsd.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Hi Julian, >>> A virtual switch for bhyve would be a useful feature if there aren't any >>> plans for one. Get up there and have it in base. ;) >> >> This has been talked about quite a bit, though nothing concrete. > Allowing bhyve to talk to netgraph would instantly give this. I think > you can already do it by > hooking the tap device into the netgraph graph. (I haven't done this for > ages bt it used to work) > at one time virtual box could also use netgraph for its networking. Not > sure if it still can. While I don't doubt the utility of being able to hook VMs to netgraph, what I was thinking (hoping) was something like a cloneable tap-like interface to bridge(4) that avoided having to create discrete tap interfaces and bind them to bridge. later, Peter.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?53A87E12.3050201>