On Tue, Feb 24, 2015 at 11:50 AM, Serge Hallyn wrote:
> Quoting Fajar A. Nugraha (l...@fajar.net):
>> On Wed, Feb 18, 2015 at 12:27 AM, Serge Hallyn
>> wrote:
>> > Quoting Fajar A. Nugraha (l...@fajar.net):
>> >> # c1's veth name on host side
>> >> auto v-c1-0
>> >> iface v-c1-0 inet static
>> >
Quoting Fajar A. Nugraha (l...@fajar.net):
> On Wed, Feb 18, 2015 at 12:27 AM, Serge Hallyn
> wrote:
> > Quoting Fajar A. Nugraha (l...@fajar.net):
> >> # c1's veth name on host side
> >> auto v-c1-0
> >> iface v-c1-0 inet static
> >
> > I'm probably just ignorant here, but - does this not cause
On Wed, Feb 18, 2015 at 12:27 AM, Serge Hallyn wrote:
> Quoting Fajar A. Nugraha (l...@fajar.net):
>> # c1's veth name on host side
>> auto v-c1-0
>> iface v-c1-0 inet static
>
> I'm probably just ignorant here, but - does this not cause 'ifup -a' to
> fail when the containers are not up?
ifup th
Quoting Fajar A. Nugraha (l...@fajar.net):
> On Mon, Feb 16, 2015 at 9:52 PM, Serge Hallyn wrote:
> > Quoting overlay fs (overla...@gmail.com):
>
> >> > > However veth works
> >> > > just fine. And you don't have to put your public link (e.g. eth0) on
> >> > > bridge mode to have a working contai
On Mon, Feb 16, 2015 at 9:52 PM, Serge Hallyn wrote:
> Quoting overlay fs (overla...@gmail.com):
>> > > However veth works
>> > > just fine. And you don't have to put your public link (e.g. eth0) on
>> > > bridge mode to have a working container with veth network.
>> >
>> > FWIW what it would tak
Quoting overlay fs (overla...@gmail.com):
> Quoting Serge Hallyn (serge.hallyn at ubuntu.com):
> > On Thu Feb 12, 2015 at 11:18 Fajar A. Nugraha wrote:
> > > On Thu, Feb 12, 2015 at 5:29 PM, Purcareata Bogdan > > freescale.com> wrote:
> > > > On 10.02.2015 19:22, Christian Brauner wrote:
> > > >>
Quoting Serge Hallyn (serge.hallyn at ubuntu.com):
> On Thu Feb 12, 2015 at 11:18 Fajar A. Nugraha wrote:
> > On Thu, Feb 12, 2015 at 5:29 PM, Purcareata Bogdan > freescale.com> wrote:
> > > On 10.02.2015 19:22, Christian Brauner wrote:
> > >>
> > >> Hello,
> >> >
>> >> is it currently possible t
Quoting Fajar A. Nugraha (l...@fajar.net):
> On Thu, Feb 12, 2015 at 5:29 PM, Purcareata Bogdan
> wrote:
> > On 10.02.2015 19:22, Christian Brauner wrote:
> >>
> >> Hello,
> >>
> >> is it currently possible to use macvlan interfaces with unprivileged
> >> containers?
> >
> >
> > +1 I noticed too
On Thu, Feb 12, 2015 at 5:29 PM, Purcareata Bogdan wrote:
> On 10.02.2015 19:22, Christian Brauner wrote:
>>
>> Hello,
>>
>> is it currently possible to use macvlan interfaces with unprivileged
>> containers?
>
>
> +1 I noticed too that it wasn't possible. This might a limitation of the
> user nam
On 10.02.2015 19:22, Christian Brauner wrote:
Hello,
is it currently possible to use macvlan interfaces with unprivileged
containers?
+1 I noticed too that it wasn't possible. This might a limitation of the
user namespace itself, since the lower device you're attaching to is
still in the hos
Hello,
is it currently possible to use macvlan interfaces with unprivileged
containers?
Best,
Christian
___
lxc-users mailing list
lxc-users@lists.linuxcontainers.org
http://lists.linuxcontainers.org/listinfo/lxc-users
11 matches
Mail list logo