On Sun, May 5, 2013 at 1:54 AM, Stephan von Krawczynski <sk...@ithnet.com> wrote: > On Sun, 5 May 2013 01:38:59 +1000 > Chris Angelico <ros...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> Hmm. I generally avoid bridged mode. I've used it once and once only >> (when virtualizing an OS/2 box that had had a parallel-port printer >> that it was providing as a network printer), and have since switched >> it to NAT (after a transitional phase, at the end of which I handed >> control of the printer over to Linux). It seemed to offer poor >> performance, so maybe I had the same issue you had. >> >> Is it any different if you switch to NAT? >> >> ChrisA > > Unfortunately NAT is no option here. This is a project where servers with > routed internet IPs will be virtualised.
Worth an experiment, at least. If nothing else, the trial would make your bug report more informative. I assume port forwarding won't cut it... that's why I was using bridged (we run netbios as well as TCP). ChrisA ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Get 100% visibility into Java/.NET code with AppDynamics Lite It's a free troubleshooting tool designed for production Get down to code-level detail for bottlenecks, with <2% overhead. Download for free and get started troubleshooting in minutes. http://p.sf.net/sfu/appdyn_d2d_ap2 _______________________________________________ VBox-users-community mailing list VBox-users-community@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/vbox-users-community _______________________________________________ Unsubscribe: mailto:vbox-users-community-requ...@lists.sourceforge.net?subject=unsubscribe
