Add usermode networking to the list of available network types
It's perfectly reasonable for privileged users to want to use usermode
networking, but currently, there's no way for them to do that. The
attached patch fixes this.
--
Soren Hansen
Ubuntu Server Team
http://www.ubuntu.com/
_______________________________________________
et-mgmt-tools mailing list
et-mgmt-tools@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/et-mgmt-tools
01-16-2008, 11:45 AM
"Daniel P. Berrange"
Add usermode networking to the list of available network types
On Wed, Jan 16, 2008 at 10:31:27AM +0100, Soren Hansen wrote:
> It's perfectly reasonable for privileged users to want to use usermode
> networking, but currently, there's no way for them to do that. The
> attached patch fixes this.
NACK, it offers nothing of benefit over the existing virtual networking
which already provides a NAT based isolated network. Usermode networking
is a crude hack which is frankly utter rubbish - the only option you
have if you're an unprivileged user, but no privleged user should be
using it. Usermode networking is also not 64-bit cleanup & will often
corrupt / drop traffic. Just say no if you're privileged.
_______________________________________________
et-mgmt-tools mailing list
et-mgmt-tools@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/et-mgmt-tools
01-16-2008, 03:43 PM
Cole Robinson
Add usermode networking to the list of available network types
Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 16, 2008 at 10:31:27AM +0100, Soren Hansen wrote:
>> It's perfectly reasonable for privileged users to want to use usermode
>> networking, but currently, there's no way for them to do that. The
>> attached patch fixes this.
>
> NACK, it offers nothing of benefit over the existing virtual networking
> which already provides a NAT based isolated network. Usermode networking
> is a crude hack which is frankly utter rubbish - the only option you
> have if you're an unprivileged user, but no privleged user should be
> using it. Usermode networking is also not 64-bit cleanup & will often
> corrupt / drop traffic. Just say no if you're privileged.
>
> Dan.
Regardless of the NACK, there are still some issues we may want to consider.
By not exposing usermode as an option and just setting it up by default, users
can't specify a mac address for the interface, and if they remove it from the
guest, there is no option to add it back. The latter could be hacked up easily
I suppose, so there really aren't dealbreakers, just things to consider.
- Cole
_______________________________________________
et-mgmt-tools mailing list
et-mgmt-tools@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/et-mgmt-tools
01-16-2008, 03:50 PM
"Daniel P. Berrange"
Add usermode networking to the list of available network types
On Wed, Jan 16, 2008 at 11:43:23AM -0500, Cole Robinson wrote:
> Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
> > On Wed, Jan 16, 2008 at 10:31:27AM +0100, Soren Hansen wrote:
> >> It's perfectly reasonable for privileged users to want to use usermode
> >> networking, but currently, there's no way for them to do that. The
> >> attached patch fixes this.
> >
> > NACK, it offers nothing of benefit over the existing virtual networking
> > which already provides a NAT based isolated network. Usermode networking
> > is a crude hack which is frankly utter rubbish - the only option you
> > have if you're an unprivileged user, but no privleged user should be
> > using it. Usermode networking is also not 64-bit cleanup & will often
> > corrupt / drop traffic. Just say no if you're privileged.
> >
> > Dan.
>
> Regardless of the NACK, there are still some issues we may want to consider.
> By not exposing usermode as an option and just setting it up by default, users
> can't specify a mac address for the interface, and if they remove it from the
> guest, there is no option to add it back. The latter could be hacked up easily
> I suppose, so there really aren't dealbreakers, just things to consider.
There is no point choosing a MAC address if you're using user mode network
because you don't have any control over usermode network stack. It always
give you the same IP addr, all outgoing traffic gets sent out with the
MAC of the host because of the way Slirp works.
_______________________________________________
et-mgmt-tools mailing list
et-mgmt-tools@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/et-mgmt-tools
01-16-2008, 04:18 PM
Soren Hansen
Add usermode networking to the list of available network types
On Wed, Jan 16, 2008 at 04:50:15PM +0000, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
> There is no point choosing a MAC address if you're using user mode
> network because you don't have any control over usermode network
> stack.
Not true. At least some OS's (Ubuntu to name one) assigns persistent
names to NIC's based on their MAC. It might be convenient for you to be
able to switch between virtual, bridged and usermode networking, but
keep the same MAC (and hence interface name).
--
Soren Hansen
Ubuntu Server Team
http://www.ubuntu.com/
_______________________________________________
et-mgmt-tools mailing list
et-mgmt-tools@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/et-mgmt-tools
01-16-2008, 04:59 PM
"Daniel P. Berrange"
Add usermode networking to the list of available network types
On Wed, Jan 16, 2008 at 06:18:56PM +0100, Soren Hansen wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 16, 2008 at 04:50:15PM +0000, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
> > There is no point choosing a MAC address if you're using user mode
> > network because you don't have any control over usermode network
> > stack.
>
> Not true. At least some OS's (Ubuntu to name one) assigns persistent
> names to NIC's based on their MAC. It might be convenient for you to be
> able to switch between virtual, bridged and usermode networking, but
> keep the same MAC (and hence interface name).
Again this goes back to the fact that switching between virtual & user
mode networking is nonsensical. If you have virtual networking or
bridged available, user networking is utterly pointless. If you don't
have virtual/bridged available and user networking is your only option
then there is no need for persistent MAC because you've got nothing
to switch between.
The ideal long term plan is to make an implementation of the virtual
networking APIs which can be used by unprivileged users too, thus killing
any need to use user mode networking at all.
User mode networking is a dead end and I've no intention to expose dead
end functionality in the UI.
Add usermode networking to the list of available network types
