deajan commented on issue #10727: URL: https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/issues/10727#issuecomment-2805281745
Hmmm... interesting. ``` 2025-04-15 15:59:16,309 DEBUG [kvm.resource.LibvirtComputingResource] (agentRequest-Handler-5:[]) (logid:04967b5d) failing to get physical interface from bridge br_bgp0, did not find an eth*, bond*, team*, vlan*, em*, p*p*, ens*, eno*, enp*, or enx* in /sys/devices/virtual/net/br_bgp0/brif ``` Looks likke indeed this is limited to physical interfaces. I've done a (stupid) check: ``` nmcli c add type dummy ifname ethdummy0 con-name ethdummy0 nmcli c mod ethdummy0 master br_bgp0 nmcli c up ethdummy0 ``` Now the agent doesn't complain anymore, since there's now a `eth*` in `/sys/devices/virtual/net/br_bgp0/brif` I guess that indeed the bridge tests are a bit too restrictive. I wonder if the test should be less restrictive, like checking if there is at least one non vtnet* interface in the bridge, so people would be allowed to use whatever they want behind the bridge (like vxlans, gretap or whatever). I can do python and bash PRs, but I really am not java fluent. Is there anyway this could be discussed for perhaps some next release ? @weizhouapache Big thanks for the hints. -- This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service. To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the URL above to go to the specific comment. To unsubscribe, e-mail: commits-unsubscr...@cloudstack.apache.org For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at: us...@infra.apache.org
