[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

[Xen-users] Re: an attempt to explain xen networking

  • To: "Dirk H. Schulz" <dirk.schulz@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • From: Molle Bestefich <molle.bestefich@xxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Fri, 3 Feb 2006 12:50:37 +0000
  • Cc: xen-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • Delivery-date: Fri, 03 Feb 2006 13:02:09 +0000
  • Domainkey-signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=beta; d=gmail.com; h=received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; b=m05n7TBWkUBvrS+aJ+oWw27/oOqA74NowIuVAZiA8OXGsLwJ7x1kL1aRnoCW19y24/pn89pwJGJcSWVpNdMWpHHO8ZLNJKFoOvxbLJqRg6zVTqx4dPB/fyacQ4orIh/idJTMpqlk0LzvhuniOphxbkvm0W9cHY/81Qe4u7jGF1o=
  • List-id: Xen user discussion <xen-users.lists.xensource.com>

Dirk H. Schulz wrote:
> It is good to have the physical interface and the dom0 interface
> separated; thus you can e.g. setup a firewall on dom0 that does not
> affect the traffic to the domUs (just for protecting dom0 alone).

Oh..  In that case, why is it _not_ good to have a separate physical
and dom0 virtual interface when you're doing routed setups?  Per
Patrick's images, there are no peth0 etc. when using the routed setup
vs. the bridging solution.

Xen-users mailing list



Lists.xenproject.org is hosted with RackSpace, monitoring our
servers 24x7x365 and backed by RackSpace's Fanatical Support®.