Date: Fri, 12 Sep 2014 16:02:07 +0100 From: Karl Pielorz <kpielorz_lst@tdx.co.uk> To: Mark Felder <feld@FreeBSD.org>, freebsd-xen@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Routing/NAT problem on Xenserver 6.2 with virtual firewall Message-ID: <F23A21BFA9B2BC8F745C5B77@Mail-PC.tdx.co.uk> In-Reply-To: <1410529669.1815882.166744545.1E24373F@webmail.messagingengine.com> References: <86k359p1qm.fsf@arch.perpetuum.hr> <9864A2A7BE97EB706ED0FC04@Mail-PC.tdx.co.uk> <1410529669.1815882.166744545.1E24373F@webmail.messagingengine.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
--On 12 September 2014 08:47 -0500 Mark Felder <feld@FreeBSD.org> wrote: > I'm confident you could patch out the HVM xn0 but keep the rest of the > HVM code so you have fast disk, etc, and you can run the xen tools which > then allows you to use XM and XSM :-) I know Roger has given me a patch > that does this while we were troubleshooting a performance issue. I did ask about that at the time - but it wasn't apparently viable (or easy? - it was a while back!)... It'd be a handy stopgap if it can be done. You suddenly realise how handy migration / motion is - when you can't have it! Our current solution is to have a separate 'HVM' only pool - where all the routing, vpn'ing, firewalling and dhcp FreeBSD VM's hang out. Even with just that workaround we could get rid of that pool, and get our agility back for those VM's... -Karl
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?F23A21BFA9B2BC8F745C5B77>