<div dir="ltr"><div><div><div><div>It's completely ok to mix interfaces.<br><br></div>We're using both veth and venet in VNs.<br><br></div>veth we're using for internal shared network between VN and HN (e.g. DNS server / MySQL).<br>
<br></div>It's better to create appropriate bridge devices for each group of VN, e.g.:<br><br></div>vzbr100<br>vzbr200<br>vzbr300<br><br>etc ..<br><br>so you add veth100 veth101 veth102 into vzbr100 and they are all in the same VLAN basically..<br>
</div><div class="gmail_extra"><br><br><div class="gmail_quote">2013/11/23 Rene C. <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:openvz@dokbua.com" target="_blank">openvz@dokbua.com</a>></span><br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
i've already been throught<br>
<a href="http://wiki.openvz.org/Differences_between_venet_and_veth" target="_blank">http://wiki.openvz.org/Differences_between_venet_and_veth</a> - what not<br>
clear to me, is it ok to mix and match the two network systems on the<br>
same hardware node? Any reason not to do this?<br>
<br>
<br>
One of our users need a hwaddr for licensing reasons so I guess we'd<br>
have to set him up with veth container right? Or is there a better<br>
way?<br>
_______________________________________________<br>
Users mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:Users@openvz.org">Users@openvz.org</a><br>
<a href="https://lists.openvz.org/mailman/listinfo/users" target="_blank">https://lists.openvz.org/mailman/listinfo/users</a><br>
</blockquote></div><br></div>