On 21/03/13 02:47, Ian Campbell wrote:
> On Wed, 2013-03-20 at 23:32 +0100, Daniel Pocock wrote:
>
>> Should the script be using the ovs-vsctl command instead of brctl?
>>
> As a general rule one should be using the ovs tools directly wherever
> possible and not the brctl compat layer.
>
>
On Wed, 2013-03-20 at 23:32 +0100, Daniel Pocock wrote:
>
> Should the script be using the ovs-vsctl command instead of brctl?
As a general rule one should be using the ovs tools directly wherever
possible and not the brctl compat layer.
> Or
> have I misconfigured something and the wrong scrip
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
On 17/03/13 18:49, Ian Campbell wrote:
> On Sun, 2013-03-17 at 18:44 +0100, Daniel Pocock wrote:
>>
>> On 17/03/13 18:38, Ian Campbell wrote:
>>> I'm afraid I don't know about the issue you are seeing but I
>>> can comment on one part:
>>>
>>> On
On Sun, 2013-03-17 at 18:44 +0100, Daniel Pocock wrote:
>
> On 17/03/13 18:38, Ian Campbell wrote:
> > I'm afraid I don't know about the issue you are seeing but I can
> > comment on one part:
> >
> > On Sun, 2013-03-17 at 15:02 +0100, Daniel Pocock wrote:
> >> while the output from dmesg suggest
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
On 17/03/13 18:38, Ian Campbell wrote:
> I'm afraid I don't know about the issue you are seeing but I can
> comment on one part:
>
> On Sun, 2013-03-17 at 15:02 +0100, Daniel Pocock wrote:
>> while the output from dmesg suggests that the interface
On Sun, 2013-03-17 at 15:02 +0100, Daniel Pocock wrote:
> xcp-fe: qemu-dm-10[9169]: can't add tap10.0 to bridge xapi1: Operation
> not supported
A google search for "linux add tap to bridge operation not supported"
shows lots of people having this sort issue (often in the absence of
Xen) although
I'm afraid I don't know about the issue you are seeing but I can comment
on one part:
On Sun, 2013-03-17 at 15:02 +0100, Daniel Pocock wrote:
> while the output from dmesg suggests that the interface vif10.0 was
> created. It appears there is confusion between the vifX.Y and tapX.Y
> naming schem
Hi,
I've been testing the Debian packages ahead of the Debian 7 release
(which is very imminent)
I believe this is a serious bug[1] in the package, as it appears that
HVM networking is broken, or at the very least, requires some
undocumented configuration step
Specifically:
- I can start the
8 matches
Mail list logo
