Bezüglich Harry Schmalzbauer's Nachricht vom 17.03.2017 10:06 (localtime): > Hello, > > I'm still having problems understanding netmap(4) and would highly > appreciate brief help. > > I'm running stable/11. I'd like to replace if_bridge(4) with netmap(4), > because virtio-net chops jumbu frames > (https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=215737) and > if_bridge(4) requires members to have the same mtu. > > I'm creating vmnet0 (tap(4)) and vale0 with an physical (keeping host > stack usage) port: > ifconfig create vmnet0 > ./vale-ctl -h vale0:igb0 > ./vale-ctl -a vale0:vmnet0 > which results in > bdg_ctl [149] bridge:0 port:0 vale0:vlegn > bdg_ctl [149] bridge:0 port:1 vale0:vlegn^ > bdg_ctl [149] bridge:0 port:2 vale0:vmnet0
The above is wrong regarding bhyve(8) usage. For the records, and please correct me somone if I'm wrong: byhve(8) has some kind of native netmap(4) implementation, so one mustn't use if_tap(4) (vmnet), but simply a vale name (e.g. 'bhyve … -s 5,virtio-net,vale0:guest1 …' instead of '… -s 5,e1000,vmnet0 …') The physical interface connected to the vale switch must be put into promisc mode! No idea about the need to disable any offloading functions, since I don't know how it's implemented… Thanks, -harry P.S.: Still don't understand the basic difference between ./bridge and ./vale-ctl _______________________________________________ freebsd-net@freebsd.org mailing list https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-net To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-net-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
