From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Sat Dec 4 22:22:05 2010 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9FF77106566C for ; Sat, 4 Dec 2010 22:22:05 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from weihang@vt.edu) Received: from lennier.cc.vt.edu (lennier.cc.vt.edu [198.82.162.213]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 55A868FC17 for ; Sat, 4 Dec 2010 22:22:05 +0000 (UTC) Received: from dagger.cc.vt.edu (dagger.cc.vt.edu [198.82.163.114]) by lennier.cc.vt.edu (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id oB4MLYTC004856; Sat, 4 Dec 2010 17:21:34 -0500 Received: from auth3.smtp.vt.edu (EHLO auth3.smtp.vt.edu) ([198.82.161.152]) by dagger.cc.vt.edu (MOS 4.2.2-FCS FastPath queued) with ESMTP id ODK97510; Sat, 04 Dec 2010 17:21:34 -0500 (EST) Received: from [172.16.1.105] (green.cs.vt.edu [128.173.236.72]) (authenticated bits=0) by auth3.smtp.vt.edu (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id oB4MLXfG030035 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO); Sat, 4 Dec 2010 17:21:33 -0500 Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1081) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii From: Weihang Wang In-Reply-To: <4CFA42D8.5010605@infracaninophile.co.uk> Date: Sat, 4 Dec 2010 17:21:33 -0500 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: <61F01BFE-B57A-43DA-A860-555174A3AE17@vt.edu> References: <4CF87854.1030103@mgwigglesworth.net> <1291368354.2905.19.camel@SHR-42-002> <4CFA42D8.5010605@infracaninophile.co.uk> To: Matthew Seaman X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1081) X-Mirapoint-Received-SPF: 198.82.161.152 auth3.smtp.vt.edu weihang@vt.edu 2 pass X-Mirapoint-IP-Reputation: reputation=neutral-1, source=Fixed, refid=n/a, actions=MAILHURDLE SPF TAG X-Junkmail-Status: score=10/50, host=dagger.cc.vt.edu X-Junkmail-Signature-Raw: score=unknown, refid=str=0001.0A02020A.4CFABEEE.0114,ss=1,fgs=0, ip=0.0.0.0, so=2010-07-22 22:03:31, dmn=2009-09-10 00:05:08, mode=single engine X-Junkmail-IWF: false Cc: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: FreeBSD on Virtualbox: No network access X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: User questions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 04 Dec 2010 22:22:05 -0000 Hi, Thank you so much for your advices. I am using NAT mode now. Just as you = said, there is no need to configure DHCP in /etc/rc.conf. I just choose = the Intel PRO/1000 T Server as my virtual network interface. It works = well.=20 Thank you very much. : ) Best, W.W. On Dec 4, 2010, at 8:32 AM, Matthew Seaman wrote: > On 03/12/2010 09:25, Timm Wimmers wrote: >> Am Freitag, den 03.12.2010, 00:33 -0500 schrieb Weihang Wang: >>> Hi Martes, >>>=20 >>> I have tried the first two interfaces which are said to be supported = by FreeBSD, they do not work. Surprisingly, now I choose the option = "Intel PRO/1000 T Server" and in NAT mode, it works now!!!! >>> Thank you so much, you do me a great favor!! Hope this also works = for Chris! >>=20 >> In most cases it is better to use bridge mode. In NAT mode your VM = get a >> private subnet and other devices in your network can't find your VM, >> because the VM is behind (or encapsulated in) your HOST (as like as = your >> HOST is behind your router to the internet). This can work if you = define >> routes, but bridging is mostly easier. >>=20 >> In Bridge mode your VM acts like any other machine in your network = and >> will get an IP-Adress from your DHCP server (if you use DHCP). >>=20 >=20 > Hmmm.... I don't know about bridge mode being appropriate in "most" > cases. NAT and bridge modes are useful in different circumstances >=20 > * NAT mode means that your VMs are not exposed to incoming > connections on the net. > * Bridge mode means that the VMs can run network services > for users on other machines. >=20 > Which one of those you prefer depends very much on how you're using = the > VMs. Eg. for a dev playground and for local testing, NAT looks like a > better idea. >=20 > Now, I run VirtualBox on my Mac with FreeBSD (inter alia) as a guest = OS. > Your setup may differ, but I find NAT mode to be the best choice. > In addition to the considerations above, I also see: >=20 > * In NAT mode, the FreeBSD guest is insulated from how the Mac > connects to the network. Switching between wired or wireless > networking, or even using a 3G dongle "just works" as far as > the FreeBSD guest is concerned. > * Similarly if the MAC gets a new IP when switching between > different networks and DHCP servers, the guest OS just doesn't > care. >=20 > You don't need to worry about configuring routing and so forth in the > guests: just use DHCP for the i/f, and it all works automagically. >=20 > Actually, I generally enable two network interfaces for unixoid guests > (ie. capable of running sshd) -- set to NAT and vboxnet0. This means = I > can ssh into local guest OSes from a Terminal.app session, which I = find > more convenient than logging in via the console. Again, it's all > configured effortlessly with DHCP. >=20 > My only complaint is that IPv6 doesn't work in these modes, but I can > live with that. >=20 > Cheers, >=20 > Matthew >=20 > --=20 > Dr Matthew J Seaman MA, D.Phil. 7 Priory Courtyard > Flat 3 > PGP: http://www.infracaninophile.co.uk/pgpkey Ramsgate > JID: matthew@infracaninophile.co.uk Kent, CT11 9PW >=20