Re: Should network-manger manage virbr0 ?

["Franck Routier (perso)" <alci mecadu org>]

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