Should network-manger manage virbr0 ?
Hi list, I'm using Ubuntu and just upgraded to (still in development) Vivid. Now I see that network-manager handles my virbr0 bridge (libvirt), which it didn't before. Vivid currently ships with nm 0.9.10.0. I can't make a decision whether this is a (packaging ?) bug or an intended feature, and what will be the consequences of nm mananging virbr0. Can anyone enlighten me ? thanks, Franck ___ networkmanager-list mailing list networkmanager-list@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/networkmanager-list
Re: Should network-manger manage virbr0 ?
On Thu, 2015-03-19 at 09:18 +0100, Franck Routier (perso) wrote: Hi list, I'm using Ubuntu and just upgraded to (still in development) Vivid. Now I see that network-manager handles my virbr0 bridge (libvirt), which it didn't before. NM will recognize and manage all network interfaces, but that does not mean that NM actually touches the interfaces. If the interface already has a configuration, NM simply assumes the existing configuration and waits for you to tell it to do something. That's a difference from older versions of NM (0.9.8 and earlier) where NM was mostly ignorant of existing configuration. We know that NM 0.9.10 still has a few edge cases where it touches interfaces and shouldn't, but almost all of those have already been fixed in NM 1.0 and later. Dan Vivid currently ships with nm 0.9.10.0. I can't make a decision whether this is a (packaging ?) bug or an intended feature, and what will be the consequences of nm mananging virbr0. Can anyone enlighten me ? thanks, Franck ___ 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
Re: Should network-manger manage virbr0 ?
Hi Dan, thanks for your input. The point is that virbr0 is handled differently than, say, vboxnet0: virbr0 appears as Bridge (virbr0) and has a _disconnect_ option. vboxnet0 appears as Ethernet Network (vboxnet0) and has no option, only saying device not managed... I was under the impression that both should have been treated the same way. Isn't it the case ? Franck On 19/03/2015 15:23, Dan Williams wrote: On Thu, 2015-03-19 at 09:18 +0100, Franck Routier (perso) wrote: Hi list, I'm using Ubuntu and just upgraded to (still in development) Vivid. Now I see that network-manager handles my virbr0 bridge (libvirt), which it didn't before. NM will recognize and manage all network interfaces, but that does not mean that NM actually touches the interfaces. If the interface already has a configuration, NM simply assumes the existing configuration and waits for you to tell it to do something. That's a difference from older versions of NM (0.9.8 and earlier) where NM was mostly ignorant of existing configuration. We know that NM 0.9.10 still has a few edge cases where it touches interfaces and shouldn't, but almost all of those have already been fixed in NM 1.0 and later. Dan Vivid currently ships with nm 0.9.10.0. I can't make a decision whether this is a (packaging ?) bug or an intended feature, and what will be the consequences of nm mananging virbr0. Can anyone enlighten me ? thanks, Franck ___ 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
