> Good to hear that !
> 
> But until now, you could use VDE too, by manually creating tun/tap device on
> Linux host, then bridging it to VBox VM on one side, and to VDE on the other
> side.
> 
> Is this solution any better?

1- It is easier, just select vde from the menu (optionally add the name of the 
switch
if you have many of them running on your host).
2- The VDE network infrastructure can be set up by an unprivileged user, there 
is no
need for root access (your solution requires root access to set up the 
vde_switch,
and to set up the kernel bridge).
3- It should be faster, as VirtualBox exchange its network packets directly 
with the
vde_switch. In the previous solution there is a useless point to point bridge 
that
processes each packet.
4- Using the "pre-existent approach", if you need a complex network involving 
VirtualBox 
VM, QEMU/KVM, User-Mode Linux and other machines, you'll have to create several 
tap interfaces 
(two for each VirtualBOX if I have understood your design, a bit messy design).
5- A change in the network topology is now as simple as typing a different 
switch name
in a text box. No tap interfaces to redefine or brctl commands to type.

I think it is fairly better.

renzo

_______________________________________________
vbox-dev mailing list
[email protected]
http://vbox.innotek.de/mailman/listinfo/vbox-dev

Reply via email to