Re: [Xen-devel] xen-unstable networking

[Chris Andrews <chris@xxxxxxxxxx>]

On 27 Mar 2004, at 16:50, Keir Fraser wrote:

> > However, while packets from the vpn are correctly routed to domains
> > other than 0, packets from those domains appear directly on the
> > physical ethernet rather than being routed via domain 0 and down the
> > vpn tunnel. This does seem to to be working as designed in that the
> > domain has access to the physical ethernet for addresses which have
> > been added to its vif, but it would be useful for this situation if 
> > the
> > packets could go via domain 0. Is this something which can be done 
> > with
> > the current code?
> Yes, it is possible. We do it automatically for 169.254.* addresses
> --- see setup_vfr_rules_for_vif() in tools/xenctl/lib/utils.py in the
> Xen source repository.
>
> A suitable fix for you is to customise your dom_create script to call
> a private copy of setup_vfr_rules_for_vif which routes 192.* addresses
> via DOM0 rather than to the physical net interface.
That seems to work fine: this rule gives domain 1 access to the vpn, 
and with a NAT rule in domain 0, access to the Internet:
ADD ACCEPT srcaddr=192.168.101.1 srcaddrmask=255.255.255.255 dst=ANY 
srcdom=1 srcidx=0 dstdom=0 dstidx=0 proto=any
Is there a way to see what the VFR rules currently are? /proc/xen/vfr 
can be read but returns nothing. Also, is there any way to flush the 
VFR rules?
Thanks,
Chris.



-------------------------------------------------------
This SF.Net email is sponsored by: IBM Linux Tutorials
Free Linux tutorial presented by Daniel Robbins, President and CEO of
GenToo technologies. Learn everything from fundamentals to system
administration.http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=1470&alloc_id=3638&op=click
_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/xen-devel