From owner-freebsd-virtualization@FreeBSD.ORG Sat Oct 25 00:01:38 2014 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-virtualization@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id CAC5948E for ; Sat, 25 Oct 2014 00:01:38 +0000 (UTC) Received: from webmail2.jnielsen.net (webmail2.jnielsen.net [50.114.224.20]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (Client CN "webmail2.jnielsen.net", Issuer "freebsdsolutions.net" (not verified)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A83FC103 for ; Sat, 25 Oct 2014 00:01:38 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [192.168.2.123] (c-50-160-123-105.hsd1.ut.comcast.net [50.160.123.105]) (authenticated bits=0) by webmail2.jnielsen.net (8.14.9/8.14.9) with ESMTP id s9P01PoK059387 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Fri, 24 Oct 2014 18:01:30 -0600 (MDT) (envelope-from lists@jnielsen.net) X-Authentication-Warning: webmail2.jnielsen.net: Host c-50-160-123-105.hsd1.ut.comcast.net [50.160.123.105] claimed to be [192.168.2.123] Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Mime-Version: 1.0 (1.0) Subject: Re: NATed or Private Network Setups From: John Nielsen X-Mailer: iPhone Mail (12B411) In-Reply-To: <544ADBEB.2030907@nomadlogic.org> Date: Fri, 24 Oct 2014 18:01:24 -0600 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: References: <544ADBEB.2030907@nomadlogic.org> To: Pete Wright Cc: "freebsd-virtualization@freebsd.org" X-BeenThere: freebsd-virtualization@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18-1 Precedence: list List-Id: "Discussion of various virtualization techniques FreeBSD supports." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 25 Oct 2014 00:01:38 -0000 > On Oct 24, 2014, at 5:08 PM, Pete Wright wrote: >=20 > Hi All, > Has anyone deployed bhyve using NAT'd or private network setups? I've > been able to deploy bridged interfaces, but I was wondering if anyone > has done other network topologies. Is there anything preventing this > from happening code wise? I reckon it could be achieved by creating a > pseudo interface? Rather than supporting something like epair(4) directly, I believe the plan i= s to allow connecting a bhyve VM to a user-space virtual switch on the host.= Neither is currently available to my knowledge. For a NAT setup today you should be able to add your VM's tap(4) interface a= s the only member of a bridge on the host and assign an IP address to the br= idge interface. Services like DHCP for this virtual subnet would need to als= o be configured on the host in addition to whatever NAT you want to use. For an internal-only network between two or more VMs on the host you could a= lso just use a bridge containing only the VM tap adapters. If you don't want= the host to participate in the network then don't put an IP on the bridge.=