Hi Denis,
Yep, my issue is with the "virtual bridge" outer interface.
I have a server set as a Hypervisor which contains a virtual switch
and multiple VMs.
The server and virtual switch both have multiple "virtual bridge"
ports. However I cannot connect the virtual bridge ports together.
When I tried no "Compatible spare ports" were found by default.
I had to add the "virtual bridge" interface to the compatible ports
page in order to have them connect.
Still wondering what the devs had in mind when they added the interface.
Chris
On Sat, Oct 15, 2016 at 9:21 AM, Denis Ovsienko <denis@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
---- On Fri, 14 Oct 2016 19:59:56 +0100 Chris Woelkers - NOAA Affiliate
wrote ----
I am setting up my first installation of racktables and have a good chunk of
it done. My racks are defined, all of my physical hardware is defined and in
their racks, all of my VMs are defined, my VLANs, IPv4, and IPv6 are defined.
Now I want to start linking them but cannot figure out how to get my VMs
linked properly.
From what I have seen of the interfaces available for this, and the
available help online, I would think that it would be handled as follows.
(<-> indicates a link in Racktables)
VM guest virtual port <-> VM switch virtual port
VM switch virtual bridge <-> VM host virtual bridge
VM host port <-> switch port
The first and third links work fine but I cannot link a virtual bridge to
anything.
Does the virtual bridge have a purpose (internal reference?) or is it just
there for looks?
Hello Chris.
If you mean the "virtual bridge" outer interface type, AFAIR it has got no
sophisticated structure behind it -- it is more like a generic port type that
signals a non-physical connection. That said, it should work like all other
port types.
As far as I can understand the question, if you have one "virtual bridge"
interface on a RackTables object that represents a VM host and another on
another object that represents a VM switch, those two ports should be
connectible.
--
Denis Ovsienko
