Re: VMware

[Vladimir Mosgalin]

Hi Yasha Karant!

 On 2015.10.30 at 08:51:52 -0700, Yasha Karant wrote next:

> The physical 802.11 WNIC is IP configured by DHCP from the ISP. Does this
> require DHCP "trickery" to transfer this information
> to the virtual 802.3 NIC under VirtualBox that is supplied to the MS Win
> guest?

In case of linux bridging, IP belongs to the bridge and is shared
between all devices on that bridge. Your dhcp client configures the
bridge, not any of the physical interfaces with the bridging. Interface
itself has to be unconfigured before bridging on IP level, but has to
exist and configured on physical level; which is easy to accomplish with
regular network (link is up - interface is bridged - IP is set up), but
trickier on wireless which offers very different "physical level"
concept (it's actually not very compatible with wired concepts). wlan
interface has to be bridged after you establish AP mode or connect to
AP, but before you start configuring IP (dhcp or else). Which is why
usually support from support from software that manages wifi connection
is needed; in my case, hostapd adds wlan0 to existing bridge by itself
at the right moment.


In short, if you are trying to bridge interfaces after IP is configured
or before "physical layer" exists (wireless is connected in case of
wlan), it's not going to work.

-- 

Vladimir

Re: VMware

[Tom H]

On Thu, Oct 29, 2015 at 12:11 PM, Vladimir Mosgalin
 wrote:
> On 2015.10.29 at 03:24:37 -0400, Tom H wrote next:
>>
>> You cannot bridge a wireless NIC:
>>
>> http://www.linuxfoundation.org/collaborate/workgroups/networking/bridge#It_doesn.27t_work_with_my_Wireless_card.21
>>
>> It's been disabled in the kernel's bridging code since 2.6.34 (AFAIR).
>
> Umm this is on SL7.1 which uses kernel 3.10
>
> $ brctl show
> bridge name bridge id STP enabled interfaces
> bridge0 8000.002590c73bd6 no eth0
> wlan0
> $ cat /etc/sl-release
> Scientific Linux release 7.1 (Nitrogen)
>
> I created bridge0 with NM and changed local ethernet to be its slave,
> after that hostapd bridged it with wlan0 with the following config
> interface=wlan0
> bridge=bridge0
>
> The wireless NIC was the random one that I got in package with some
> other motherboard, I didn't mess with firmware or anything like that
>
> $ lspci | grep Wireless
> 01:00.0 Network controller: Qualcomm Atheros AR9462 Wireless Network Adapter 
> (rev 01)
>
> Somehow I doubt that I managed to fall into 1% of users who has special
> card with special firmware. The documents you linked must not be telling
> the whole story. Or just outdated, as it was written in the 2009.

I'd say that you fall into the special 0%! LOL

More seriously, hostapd is a third (ebtables, proxy-arp) way to solve
the problem.

>From linux-4.2.5/net/bridge/br_if.c

/* No bridging devices that dislike that (e.g. wireless) */
if (dev->priv_flags & IFF_DONT_BRIDGE)
return -EOPNOTSUPP;

Re: VMware

[Vladimir Mosgalin]

Hi Yasha Karant!

 On 2015.10.29 at 13:28:21 -0700, Yasha Karant wrote next:

> You seem to display a bridge between an 802.3 (eth) and an 802.11 (wnic).

Right.

Note that I only did that for purposes of software AP. This is router
which provides both wired and wireless network connectivity, which are
bridged for network uniformity (no routing, broadcast and multicast
passing, no dhcp forwarding trickery and so on).

I can show you configuration but it doesn't mean that it would work for
you with wireless NIC not in AP mode. That said, if THIS way won't work
for you, it doesn't mean it's impossible at all: try Open vSwitch! It is
much more agile compared to standard linux bridging, especially in areas
related to bridging between multiple interfaces created on the fly,
VLANs and such, making it very useful on virtualization hosts.

> In any event, a copy (typescript, screenshots, etc.) of the actual commands
> you used, any needed configuration files, and a copy of any outputs produced
> during the activation/configuration greatly would be appreciated.

I set up bridge in NM with nmtui. You can find guides on setting it up
with NM GUI / nmcli combo, e.g.
https://www.happyassassin.net/2014/07/23/bridged-networking-for-libvirt-with-networkmanager-2014-fedora-21/
https://access.redhat.com/documentation/en-US/Red_Hat_Enterprise_Linux/7/html/Networking_Guide/sec-Network_Bridging_Using_the_NetworkManager_Command_Line_Tool_nmcli.html

NM creates bridge0 and adds eth0 to it, sets up IPs and such after that.
Wireless device wlan0 is set up much later, and hostapd adds wlan0 to
that bridge after it finishes configuring wireless lan. It's impossible
to add uncofigured wlan0 device to bridge.

Either way, the resulting configuration files look like

$ cat /etc/sysconfig/network-scripts/ifcfg-bridge0
DEVICE=bridge0
STP=no
TYPE=Bridge
BOOTPROTO=none
DNS1=127.0.0.1
DOMAIN=asgard
DEFROUTE=no
IPV4_FAILURE_FATAL=no
IPV6INIT=yes
IPV6_AUTOCONF=no
IPV6ADDR=
IPV6_DEFROUTE=no
IPV6_FAILURE_FATAL=no
NAME=bridge0
UUID=c10629d4-3fc8-4987-98d2-b82799419e49
ONBOOT=yes
IPADDR=192.168.2.1
PREFIX=24

$ cat /etc/sysconfig/network-scripts/ifcfg-bridge0_eth0 
TYPE=Ethernet
NAME=bridge0_eth0
UUID=a3810633-5171-4946-9e60-f3a09bd7f4e7
DEVICE=eth0
ONBOOT=yes
BRIDGE=c10629d4-3fc8-4987-98d2-b82799419e49


I won't publish the whole hostapd.conf file, related lines are

interface=wlan0
bridge=bridge0


As for the log file, here are the lines related to eth0/wlan0/bridge0
initialization:
http://pastebin.com/zVjfcqBj

-- 

Vladimir

Re: VMware

[Yasha Karant]

Hi Vladimir,

The physical 802.11 WNIC is IP configured by DHCP from the ISP. Does 
this require DHCP "trickery" to transfer this information
to the virtual 802.3 NIC under VirtualBox that is supplied to the MS Win 
guest?


Yasha Karant

On 10/30/2015 08:27 AM, Vladimir Mosgalin wrote:

Hi Yasha Karant!

  On 2015.10.29 at 13:28:21 -0700, Yasha Karant wrote next:


You seem to display a bridge between an 802.3 (eth) and an 802.11 (wnic).

Right.

Note that I only did that for purposes of software AP. This is router
which provides both wired and wireless network connectivity, which are
bridged for network uniformity (no routing, broadcast and multicast
passing, no dhcp forwarding trickery and so on).

I can show you configuration but it doesn't mean that it would work for
you with wireless NIC not in AP mode. That said, if THIS way won't work
for you, it doesn't mean it's impossible at all: try Open vSwitch! It is
much more agile compared to standard linux bridging, especially in areas
related to bridging between multiple interfaces created on the fly,
VLANs and such, making it very useful on virtualization hosts.


In any event, a copy (typescript, screenshots, etc.) of the actual commands
you used, any needed configuration files, and a copy of any outputs produced
during the activation/configuration greatly would be appreciated.

I set up bridge in NM with nmtui. You can find guides on setting it up
with NM GUI / nmcli combo, e.g.
https://www.happyassassin.net/2014/07/23/bridged-networking-for-libvirt-with-networkmanager-2014-fedora-21/
https://access.redhat.com/documentation/en-US/Red_Hat_Enterprise_Linux/7/html/Networking_Guide/sec-Network_Bridging_Using_the_NetworkManager_Command_Line_Tool_nmcli.html

NM creates bridge0 and adds eth0 to it, sets up IPs and such after that.
Wireless device wlan0 is set up much later, and hostapd adds wlan0 to
that bridge after it finishes configuring wireless lan. It's impossible
to add uncofigured wlan0 device to bridge.

Either way, the resulting configuration files look like

$ cat /etc/sysconfig/network-scripts/ifcfg-bridge0
DEVICE=bridge0
STP=no
TYPE=Bridge
BOOTPROTO=none
DNS1=127.0.0.1
DOMAIN=asgard
DEFROUTE=no
IPV4_FAILURE_FATAL=no
IPV6INIT=yes
IPV6_AUTOCONF=no
IPV6ADDR=
IPV6_DEFROUTE=no
IPV6_FAILURE_FATAL=no
NAME=bridge0
UUID=c10629d4-3fc8-4987-98d2-b82799419e49
ONBOOT=yes
IPADDR=192.168.2.1
PREFIX=24

$ cat /etc/sysconfig/network-scripts/ifcfg-bridge0_eth0
TYPE=Ethernet
NAME=bridge0_eth0
UUID=a3810633-5171-4946-9e60-f3a09bd7f4e7
DEVICE=eth0
ONBOOT=yes
BRIDGE=c10629d4-3fc8-4987-98d2-b82799419e49


I won't publish the whole hostapd.conf file, related lines are

interface=wlan0
bridge=bridge0


As for the log file, here are the lines related to eth0/wlan0/bridge0
initialization:
http://pastebin.com/zVjfcqBj

Re: VMware

[Vladimir Mosgalin]

Hi Tom H!

 On 2015.10.29 at 03:24:37 -0400, Tom H wrote next:

> You cannot bridge a wireless NIC:
> 
> http://www.linuxfoundation.org/collaborate/workgroups/networking/bridge#It_doesn.27t_work_with_my_Wireless_card.21
> 
> It's been disabled in the kernel's bridging code since 2.6.34 (AFAIR).

Umm this is on SL7.1 which uses kernel 3.10

$ brctl show
bridge name bridge id   STP enabled interfaces
bridge0 8000.002590c73bd6   no  eth0
wlan0
$ cat /etc/sl-release 
Scientific Linux release 7.1 (Nitrogen)

I created bridge0 with NM and changed local ethernet to be its slave,
after that hostapd bridged it with wlan0 with the following config
interface=wlan0
bridge=bridge0

The wireless NIC was the random one that I got in package with some
other motherboard, I didn't mess with firmware or anything like that

$ lspci | grep Wireless
01:00.0 Network controller: Qualcomm Atheros AR9462 Wireless Network Adapter 
(rev 01)

Somehow I doubt that I managed to fall into 1% of users who has special
card with special firmware. The documents you linked must not be telling
the whole story. Or just outdated, as it was written in the 2009.

> 
> There are web sites that show how to get around this limitation via
> either ebtables or proxy-arp. I've never tried either but I assume
> that, since VirtualBox and VMware allow it, they must use a similar
> workaround under the cover.
> 
> I launch VMs with "qemu-system-x86_64 ... -netdev
> bridge,br=bridge0,id=net0 ..." on my laptop without adding my wireless
> NIC to br0 and I set up forwarding of a VM's packets with:
> 
> # echo "1" > /proc/sys/net/ipv4/ip_forward
> and
> # iptables -t nat -A POSTROUTING -o wifi0 -j MASQUERADE
> or
> # iptables -t nat -A POSTROUTING -s 10.0.2.0/24 ! -d 10.0.2.0/24 -j MASQUERADE
> 
> If you use libvirt, define a "routed" network with virsh, and choose
> it when you create a VM, virt-install sets up the forwarding
> automatically.
> 
> You haven't said whether you want to be able to access VMs from
> another box but, FYI, I can ssh to VMs from another laptop by running
> "ip ro add 10.0.2.0/24 via 192.168.1.43 dev wifi0" on that laptop,
> where 192.168.1.43 is the ip address of the laptop hosting the VMs.
> 

-- 

Vladimir

Re: VMware

[Lamar Owen]

On 10/29/2015 01:45 AM, prmari...@gmail.com wrote:

If you have slow video performance on KVM look into spice. Which is not 
included with SL but it's not hard to add.
It is included in the repos; I consider being in the repos to be 
included with SL.  Spice makes things really nice.

Re: VMware

[Yasha Karant]

Vladimir,

You seem to display a bridge between an 802.3 (eth) and an 802.11 (wnic).

I am running on 4 hours sleep right now and still have 7 hours before I 
may leave for home; thus I apologize for being too exhausted to figure 
out the actual commands and configurations to implement what you display 
that evidently would work.  My laptop has both a physical 802.3 
interface and a physical 802.11 interface, with the 802.3 rarely used 
(most sites only provide 802.11).  Do I add under SL 7.1 a "virtual" eth 
(e.g., an eth1) on the host, then make that a slave to the physical 
802.11 wnic on the host, and then attach VirtualBox to the virtual eth 
on the host via NAT under VirtualBox?


In any event, a copy (typescript, screenshots, etc.) of the actual 
commands you used, any needed configuration files, and a copy of any 
outputs produced during the activation/configuration greatly would be 
appreciated.


As for the comment from someone in this email exchange that VirtualBox 
NAT works from a wnic to the internal 802.3 virtual eth on the virtual 
machine that supports MS Win 7 -- it does not, hence my query.


Yasha Karant

On 10/29/2015 09:11 AM, Vladimir Mosgalin wrote:

Hi Tom H!

  On 2015.10.29 at 03:24:37 -0400, Tom H wrote next:


You cannot bridge a wireless NIC:

http://www.linuxfoundation.org/collaborate/workgroups/networking/bridge#It_doesn.27t_work_with_my_Wireless_card.21

It's been disabled in the kernel's bridging code since 2.6.34 (AFAIR).

Umm this is on SL7.1 which uses kernel 3.10

$ brctl show
bridge name bridge id   STP enabled interfaces
bridge0 8000.002590c73bd6   no  eth0
 wlan0
$ cat /etc/sl-release
Scientific Linux release 7.1 (Nitrogen)

I created bridge0 with NM and changed local ethernet to be its slave,
after that hostapd bridged it with wlan0 with the following config
interface=wlan0
bridge=bridge0

The wireless NIC was the random one that I got in package with some
other motherboard, I didn't mess with firmware or anything like that

$ lspci | grep Wireless
01:00.0 Network controller: Qualcomm Atheros AR9462 Wireless Network Adapter 
(rev 01)

Somehow I doubt that I managed to fall into 1% of users who has special
card with special firmware. The documents you linked must not be telling
the whole story. Or just outdated, as it was written in the 2009.


There are web sites that show how to get around this limitation via
either ebtables or proxy-arp. I've never tried either but I assume
that, since VirtualBox and VMware allow it, they must use a similar
workaround under the cover.

I launch VMs with "qemu-system-x86_64 ... -netdev
bridge,br=bridge0,id=net0 ..." on my laptop without adding my wireless
NIC to br0 and I set up forwarding of a VM's packets with:

# echo "1" > /proc/sys/net/ipv4/ip_forward
and
# iptables -t nat -A POSTROUTING -o wifi0 -j MASQUERADE
or
# iptables -t nat -A POSTROUTING -s 10.0.2.0/24 ! -d 10.0.2.0/24 -j MASQUERADE

If you use libvirt, define a "routed" network with virsh, and choose
it when you create a VM, virt-install sets up the forwarding
automatically.

You haven't said whether you want to be able to access VMs from
another box but, FYI, I can ssh to VMs from another laptop by running
"ip ro add 10.0.2.0/24 via 192.168.1.43 dev wifi0" on that laptop,
where 192.168.1.43 is the ip address of the laptop hosting the VMs.



<>

Re: VMware

[Tom H]

On Mon, Oct 26, 2015 at 2:45 PM, Yasha Karant  wrote:


> Although the KVM solution discussed here may work, the description of this
> in operation appears to be a true
> hypervisor even when only used to run, say, MS Windows as an application
> environment virtual machine under SL. That is, this solution is not the
> same "in spirit" as is VirtualBox. On a hard 802.3 wired connection,
> VirtualBox does provide Internet access to the outside world from the guest;
> this seems to be a failure on a 802.11 ISP wifi connection. JHas anyone
> used VMware-Player-12.0.0-2985596.x86_64.bundle on a SL7 host with a MS Win
> guest?

I don't see why you think that VirtualBox and VMware aren't
hypervisors like KVM.


> If so, is the "free" version stripped of sufficient features as not to be
> useful in a "production" environment? I do not need merely to look at
> pretty pictures of a running guest environment; I need to access the
> Internet. to share files (e.g., docx, pptx, etc.) between the Linux host and
> the MS Windows guest, and to access both USB devices and the DVD drive of
> the host on the guest.
>
> My institution cannot afford the US$249 for the VMware Workstation license,
> and I cannot justify the expenditure of research funds. However, VMware
> player is licensed for free for non-commercial private use (mine).
>
> I do note that my query on the failure of VirtualBox to work with 802.11
> host Linux networks and thus supply a connection to the guest OS within
> VirtualBox now has had 46 views on the VirtualBox Linux host "forum" without
> a reply -- evidently, this is a problem with the current VirtualBox for
> which no one has a viable solution -- hence my interest in VMware Player.

You cannot bridge a wireless NIC:

http://www.linuxfoundation.org/collaborate/workgroups/networking/bridge#It_doesn.27t_work_with_my_Wireless_card.21

It's been disabled in the kernel's bridging code since 2.6.34 (AFAIR).

There are web sites that show how to get around this limitation via
either ebtables or proxy-arp. I've never tried either but I assume
that, since VirtualBox and VMware allow it, they must use a similar
workaround under the cover.

I launch VMs with "qemu-system-x86_64 ... -netdev
bridge,br=bridge0,id=net0 ..." on my laptop without adding my wireless
NIC to br0 and I set up forwarding of a VM's packets with:

# echo "1" > /proc/sys/net/ipv4/ip_forward
and
# iptables -t nat -A POSTROUTING -o wifi0 -j MASQUERADE
or
# iptables -t nat -A POSTROUTING -s 10.0.2.0/24 ! -d 10.0.2.0/24 -j MASQUERADE

If you use libvirt, define a "routed" network with virsh, and choose
it when you create a VM, virt-install sets up the forwarding
automatically.

You haven't said whether you want to be able to access VMs from
another box but, FYI, I can ssh to VMs from another laptop by running
"ip ro add 10.0.2.0/24 via 192.168.1.43 dev wifi0" on that laptop,
where 192.168.1.43 is the ip address of the laptop hosting the VMs.

Re: VMware

[Francesco M. Taurino]

hi,

yes, the wlan card seems fully connected.

in virtualbox 4 or 5, when you create a virtual machine,
in the network settings panel, select the bridge mode and
the physical nic you want to use, like in this screenshot:

http://i.imgur.com/FYr4BZs.png

(in italian, but clear I hope...)

it works even in open source edition of virtualbox and if the
host is connected to a wpa2 enterprise secured wifi network.

have a nice day,

francesco

Il 29/10/2015 06:33, Yasha Karant ha scritto:

Hi Francesco,

I just installed VirtualBox-5.0-5.0.6_103037_el7-1.x86_64.rpm along 
with Oracle_VM_VirtualBox_Extension_Pack-5.0.6-103037.vbox-extpack

and the MS Win tools package of the above VirtualBox release to no avail.

What do you mean by "wifi adapter must be fully connected on your 
linux host"?


On the SL7 host, ifconfig -a shows:

wlp61s0: flags=4163  mtu 1500
inet 192.168.[redacted]  netmask 255.255.255.0  broadcast 
192.168.[redacted]

inet6 [redacted]  prefixlen 64  scopeid 0x20
ether [redacted]  txqueuelen 1000  (Ethernet)
RX packets 45054  bytes 47174187 (44.9 MiB)
RX errors 0  dropped 0  overruns 0  frame 0
TX packets 28494  bytes 3464767 (3.3 MiB)
TX errors 0  dropped 0 overruns 0  carrier 0  collisions 0

with the above redacted just in the event of any attempted compromises 
from any inappropriate use of this public list
(not by any legitimate subscribers).  However, all of the redacted 
data is valid and wlp61s0 is fully functional.


Is this "fully connected"?

As for KVM, I have other reservations about this on a workstation (not 
hardened server with external firewall defense) -- but that is a separate

subject.

Yasha Karant

On 10/28/2015 12:54 AM, Francesco M. Taurino wrote:

hi yasha,

kvm windows 7/8/10 guests can be a bit slow in graphic applications, 
but quite usable

if you need cpu/memory raw power.

you can use virtualbox, and bridge the virtual lan card of your guest 
to a physical lan
or a wifi adapter. the wifi adapter must be fully connected on your 
linux host.


ftaurino

Il 27/10/2015 10:31, Karel Lang AFD ha scritto:

Hi,
just q. (i surely missed it in earlier conv.) - why can't you use 
KVM as a virtualization layer?


I use KVM on servers, workstations, laptops and i find it has all i 
need.


I just missed thing like 'shared folder' between host/guest like eg. 
vbox has, but this can be remedied by compiling/turning on the 9pFS 
in kernel, if the 10Gbps of the NATed internal networking with 
virtio driver is not enough.

Re: VMware

[Francesco M. Taurino]

hi yasha,

kvm windows 7/8/10 guests can be a bit slow in graphic applications, but 
quite usable

if you need cpu/memory raw power.

you can use virtualbox, and bridge the virtual lan card of your guest to 
a physical lan
or a wifi adapter. the wifi adapter must be fully connected on your 
linux host.


ftaurino

Il 27/10/2015 10:31, Karel Lang AFD ha scritto:

Hi,
just q. (i surely missed it in earlier conv.) - why can't you use KVM 
as a virtualization layer?


I use KVM on servers, workstations, laptops and i find it has all i need.

I just missed thing like 'shared folder' between host/guest like eg. 
vbox has, but this can be remedied by compiling/turning on the 9pFS in 
kernel, if the 10Gbps of the NATed internal networking with virtio 
driver is not enough.

Re: VMware

[prmarino1]

If you have slow video performance on KVM look into spice. Which is not 
included with SL but it's not hard to add.
Bridged networks are not hard to add to any of these solutions‎, unreliable 
WiFi can be though under all of them. If you want to make it more tolerant of 
such issues you have two options
1 open vswitch‎
2 create the bridge ‎manually in /etc/sysconfig/network-scripts and attach the 
wifi interface too it. Note that means that the dhcp client has to be attached 
to the bridge, and I don't know if Network Manager will work well for that 
configuration.‎

Your best bet with WiFi is to do NAT.

  Original Message  
From: Francesco M. Taurino
Sent: Wednesday, October 28, 2015 03:54
To: SCIENTIFIC-LINUX-USERS@fnal.gov
Subject: Re: VMware

hi yasha,

kvm windows 7/8/10 guests can be a bit slow in graphic applications, but 
quite usable
if you need cpu/memory raw power.

you can use virtualbox, and bridge the virtual lan card of your guest to 
a physical lan
or a wifi adapter. the wifi adapter must be fully connected on your 
linux host.

ftaurino

Il 27/10/2015 10:31, Karel Lang AFD ha scritto:
> Hi,
> just q. (i surely missed it in earlier conv.) - why can't you use KVM 
> as a virtualization layer?
>
> I use KVM on servers, workstations, laptops and i find it has all i need.
>
> I just missed thing like 'shared folder' between host/guest like eg. 
> vbox has, but this can be remedied by compiling/turning on the 9pFS in 
> kernel, if the 10Gbps of the NATed internal networking with virtio 
> driver is not enough.
>
>

Re: VMware

[Yasha Karant]

Hi Francesco,

I just installed VirtualBox-5.0-5.0.6_103037_el7-1.x86_64.rpm along with 
Oracle_VM_VirtualBox_Extension_Pack-5.0.6-103037.vbox-extpack

and the MS Win tools package of the above VirtualBox release to no avail.

What do you mean by "wifi adapter must be fully connected on your linux 
host"?


On the SL7 host, ifconfig -a shows:

wlp61s0: flags=4163  mtu 1500
inet 192.168.[redacted]  netmask 255.255.255.0  broadcast 
192.168.[redacted]

inet6 [redacted]  prefixlen 64  scopeid 0x20
ether [redacted]  txqueuelen 1000  (Ethernet)
RX packets 45054  bytes 47174187 (44.9 MiB)
RX errors 0  dropped 0  overruns 0  frame 0
TX packets 28494  bytes 3464767 (3.3 MiB)
TX errors 0  dropped 0 overruns 0  carrier 0  collisions 0

with the above redacted just in the event of any attempted compromises 
from any inappropriate use of this public list
(not by any legitimate subscribers).  However, all of the redacted data 
is valid and wlp61s0 is fully functional.


Is this "fully connected"?

As for KVM, I have other reservations about this on a workstation (not 
hardened server with external firewall defense) -- but that is a separate

subject.

Yasha Karant

On 10/28/2015 12:54 AM, Francesco M. Taurino wrote:

hi yasha,

kvm windows 7/8/10 guests can be a bit slow in graphic applications, 
but quite usable

if you need cpu/memory raw power.

you can use virtualbox, and bridge the virtual lan card of your guest 
to a physical lan
or a wifi adapter. the wifi adapter must be fully connected on your 
linux host.


ftaurino

Il 27/10/2015 10:31, Karel Lang AFD ha scritto:

Hi,
just q. (i surely missed it in earlier conv.) - why can't you use KVM 
as a virtualization layer?


I use KVM on servers, workstations, laptops and i find it has all i 
need.


I just missed thing like 'shared folder' between host/guest like eg. 
vbox has, but this can be remedied by compiling/turning on the 9pFS 
in kernel, if the 10Gbps of the NATed internal networking with virtio 
driver is not enough.

Re: VMware

[Nico Kadel-Garcia]

On Mon, Oct 26, 2015 at 2:45 PM, Yasha Karant  wrote:

> I do note that my query on the failure of VirtualBox to work with 802.11
> host Linux networks and thus supply a connection to the guest OS within
> VirtualBox now has had 46 views on the VirtualBox Linux host "forum" without
> a reply -- evidently, this is a problem with the current VirtualBox for
> which no one has a viable solution -- hence my interest in VMware Player.

The number of people gawking at a traffic accident is not an indicator
that the accident was caused by a manufacturer conspiracy.

Re: VMware

[Karel Lang AFD]

Hi,
just q. (i surely missed it in earlier conv.) - why can't you use KVM as 
a virtualization layer?


I use KVM on servers, workstations, laptops and i find it has all i need.

I just missed thing like 'shared folder' between host/guest like eg. 
vbox has, but this can be remedied by compiling/turning on the 9pFS in 
kernel, if the 10Gbps of the NATed internal networking with virtio 
driver is not enough.



--
*Karel Lang*
*Unix/Linux Administration*
l...@afd.cz | +420 731 13 40 40
AUFEER DESIGN, s.r.o. | www.aufeerdesign.cz


On 10/27/2015 09:30 AM, Nico Kadel-Garcia wrote:

On Mon, Oct 26, 2015 at 2:45 PM, Yasha Karant  wrote:


I do note that my query on the failure of VirtualBox to work with 802.11
host Linux networks and thus supply a connection to the guest OS within
VirtualBox now has had 46 views on the VirtualBox Linux host "forum" without
a reply -- evidently, this is a problem with the current VirtualBox for
which no one has a viable solution -- hence my interest in VMware Player.


The number of people gawking at a traffic accident is not an indicator
that the accident was caused by a manufacturer conspiracy.

Re: VMware

[Akemi Yagi]

On Mon, Oct 26, 2015 at 11:45 AM, Yasha Karant  wrote:
> Although the KVM solution discussed here may work, the description of this
> in operation appears to be a true
> hypervisor even when only used to run, say, MS Windows as an application
> environment virtual machine under SL.  That is, this solution is not the
> same "in spirit" as is VirtualBox.  On a hard 802.3 wired connection,
> VirtualBox does provide Internet access to the outside world from the guest;
> this seems to be a failure on a 802.11 ISP wifi connection.  JHas anyone
> used VMware-Player-12.0.0-2985596.x86_64.bundle on a SL7 host with a MS Win
> guest?
>
> If so, is the "free" version stripped of sufficient features as not to be
> useful in a "production" environment?  I do not need merely to look at
> pretty pictures of a running guest environment; I need to access the
> Internet. to share files (e.g., docx, pptx, etc.) between the Linux host and
> the MS Windows guest, and to access both USB devices and the DVD drive of
> the host on the guest.
>
> My institution cannot afford the US$249 for the VMware Workstation license,
> and I cannot justify the expenditure of research funds. However, VMware
> player is licensed for free for non-commercial private use (mine).
>
> I do note that my query on the failure of VirtualBox to work with 802.11
> host Linux networks and thus supply a connection to the guest OS within
> VirtualBox now has had 46 views on the VirtualBox Linux host "forum" without
> a reply -- evidently, this is a problem with the current VirtualBox for
> which no one has a viable solution -- hence my interest in VMware Player.
>
> Yasha Karant

I googled the subject and hit this one:

http://kb.vmware.com/selfservice/microsites/search.do?language=en_US=displayKC=760
(Using bridged networking with a wireless NIC)

Akemi

Re: VMware

[Lamar Owen]

On 10/26/2015 02:45 PM, Yasha Karant wrote:
Although the KVM solution discussed here may work, the description of 
this in operation appears to be a true
hypervisor even when only used to run, say, MS Windows as an 
application environment virtual machine under SL.  That is, this 
solution is not the same "in spirit" as is VirtualBox. 


KVM will do what you need, and it will look very similar in operation to 
VirtualBox.  And it is already built-in to SL.  Not sure why you object 
to it when it has a very similar interface and works nearly 
identically.  Why don't you actually try it yourself?


On a hard 802.3 wired connection, VirtualBox does provide Internet 
access to the outside world from the guest; this seems to be a failure 
on a 802.11 ISP wifi connection.  JHas anyone used 
VMware-Player-12.0.0-2985596.x86_64.bundle on a SL7 host with a MS Win 
guest?


VMware-Player has, over the years, been somewhat crippled compared to 
VMware Workstation.  I have a license of several versions of VMware 
Workstation, and I have a license for VMware Fusion on OSX. The KVM 
interface on EL7 works better than either, in my experience.  And I say 
this while actively using a Windows 7 VM right now in a window on my EL7 
desktop (and connected through 802.11 wireless.)

Re: VMware

[Yasha Karant]

On 10/26/2015 12:27 PM, Eero Volotinen wrote:



2015-10-26 20:45 GMT+02:00 Yasha Karant >:


Although the KVM solution discussed here may work, the description
of this in operation appears to be a true
hypervisor even when only used to run, say, MS Windows as an
application environment virtual machine under SL.  That is, this
solution is not the same "in spirit" as is VirtualBox.  On a hard
802.3 wired connection, VirtualBox does provide Internet access to
the outside world from the guest; this seems to be a failure on a
802.11 ISP wifi connection.  JHas anyone used
VMware-Player-12.0.0-2985596 .x86_64.bundle on a
SL7 host with a MS Win guest?


Did you really enabled bridged interface for host on VirtualBox?

--
Eero


Yes -- I just tried it again.  The only network that seems to be active 
is vboxnet -- which is detected by Network Manager, but Network Manager 
cannot activate vboxne -- Network Manager just "spins".MS Win 7 Pro 
complains that there is no network adapter -- although the Intel MT 
hardware appears under the MS Win hardware GUI.  Does VirtualBox with a 
MS Win 7 guest have Internet access from the MS Win guest on your 
system?  What configuration are you using?  Could it be specific IEEE 
802.11 WNICs under SL -- some work, some do not with VirtualBox current? 
This used to work with an earlier 32 bit SL 6 system and an earlier 
release of VirtualBox. Note that the MS Win guest is 32 bit although 
both SL 7 and the VirtualBox system are 64 bit.


Yasha Karant

Re: VMware

[Eero Volotinen]

Hi,

I have never used virtualbox under RHEL clones, but it works fine on UBuntu
(network also). How about trying to create bridged interface to normal
network using brctl cli tool?



--
Eero

2015-10-27 5:43 GMT+02:00 Yasha Karant :

>
> On 10/26/2015 12:27 PM, Eero Volotinen wrote:
>
>
>
> 2015-10-26 20:45 GMT+02:00 Yasha Karant :
>
>> Although the KVM solution discussed here may work, the description of
>> this in operation appears to be a true
>> hypervisor even when only used to run, say, MS Windows as an application
>> environment virtual machine under SL.  That is, this solution is not the
>> same "in spirit" as is VirtualBox.  On a hard 802.3 wired connection,
>> VirtualBox does provide Internet access to the outside world from the
>> guest; this seems to be a failure on a 802.11 ISP wifi connection.  JHas
>> anyone used VMware-Player-12.0.0-2985596.x86_64.bundle on a SL7 host
>> with a MS Win guest?
>>
>
> Did you really enabled bridged interface for host on VirtualBox?
>
> --
> Eero
>
>
> Yes -- I just tried it again.  The only network that seems to be active is
> vboxnet -- which is detected by Network Manager, but Network Manager cannot
> activate vboxne -- Network Manager just "spins".MS Win 7 Pro complains
> that there is no network adapter -- although the Intel MT hardware appears
> under the MS Win hardware GUI.  Does VirtualBox with a MS Win 7 guest have
> Internet access from the MS Win guest on your system?  What configuration
> are you using?  Could it be specific IEEE 802.11 WNICs under SL -- some
> work, some do not with VirtualBox current? This used to work with an
> earlier 32 bit SL 6 system and an earlier release of VirtualBox.  Note that
> the MS Win guest is 32 bit although both SL 7 and the VirtualBox system are
> 64 bit.
>
> Yasha Karant
>
>