On Fri, 2014-10-17 at 09:28 -0400, Dan Winship wrote: > There's a bunch of discussion about this in > https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=731014. The short answer is > "it's complicated", because veths get used for a bunch of different > things in different situations...
I'm not sure I understand the outcome there. Not assuming assuming the connection on a device that is in fact not configured does not imply doing DHCP on that device. If the user won't create a connection for the veth device NM won't touch it anyway, would it? > -- Dan Lubo > On 10/16/2014 07:08 AM, Lubomir Rintel wrote: > > Hi, > > > > currently it is impossible to get useful network configuration for LXC > > containers on boot. (At least if they're managed via libvirt; I have no > > idea if anything is different with native LXC tooling). They're supposed > > to obtain their configuration via DHCP, but instead connection is assumed. > > Firstly because there's an IPv6 local link address that (I think) gets > > assigned when libvirt ups the interface and secondly because it's a > > software link. > > > > Why do we assume connection on all software links? Virtual ethernet devices > > are supposed to behave much like ordinary ethernet devices; they have > > carrier detection, etc. > > > > I'm following up with the patches that resolve the problem for me, but > > I'm not quite sure about the special case for veth. > > > > Thoughts? > > > > Thank you, > > Lubo > > > > _______________________________________________ > > networkmanager-list mailing list > > networkmanager-list@gnome.org > > https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/networkmanager-list > > _______________________________________________ networkmanager-list mailing list networkmanager-list@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/networkmanager-list
