Don't focus on the boonding its transparent once configured. Treat the bonded interface bondx like it was a ethx and the guides will make sense. I beleave off the top of my head the answer is apply the bridge to the vlan interface unless you want the vlan tags to go to the vms and do 802.1Q on the vms. I know running 802.1Q to a vm sounds crazy but I've seen it done to run switch emulators in virtual machines and it is something I know a few switch manufacturers are talking about releasing as a supported product so newtork enginers can transparently manage virtual switch infrastructure asthough it were a hardware switch. I've also seen it done by hosting managed providers who virtualize their clients managed firewalls as a service. On Sep 24, 2012 7:25 PM, "Nico Kadel-Garcia" <[email protected]> wrote:
> I've got an SL 6 setup to deal with which I inherited, with hosts that > only have two NIC's, need to be on three VLAN's, and need to run KVM > virtual servers. 9Actually, they may wind up as our favorite upstream > vendor's distribution, but I'm working with what I have now.) > > NetworkManager, of course, remains the utterly useless kludge that it > always has been as far as pair bonding is concerned. I've got the > VLAN's working on toop of the pair bonds by disabling NetworkManager, > setting up bond0 as a bonded pair of eth0 and eth1, and adding virtual > ports called bond0.vlan1, bond0.vlan2, etc., and adding the "VLAN=yes" > to ifcfg-bond0.vlan1, ifcfg-bond0.vlan2, etc. > > No problem so far. But now I need to to bridged ports for KVM, and I'm > trying to assemble the necessary bits. Do I just need to say "don't do > the VLAN's", or does someone have a graceful set of options for doing > KVM briding *on top of * bonded ports doing VLAN's? > > I see lots of guidelines for doing any one or two of the three, but > tying them all together has been a bit fraught. >
