Xen and The Art of Free Speech

8 Responses

1. Miguel de Icaza says:

   2007-10-01 at 10:11 pm

   Chomsky is talk­ing about the arti­cle, and he basi­cally agrees with the premise, but dis­agrees that only the Lobby is to blame for, that there is plenty of other blame to go around.

   I have not read the book in its entirety, but it sig­nif­i­cantly larger than the arti­cle that you can read in a cou­ple of hours.

2. Martin Coxall says:

   2007-10-02 at 4:04 am

   It’s not great for GNOME, really though, is it?

   That you let this fetid, anti-semitic, cretino-leftists, Microsoft-arse-licking lick­spit­tle get away with spew­ing his passive-aggressive unpleas­ant­ness across your free soft­ware project blogregator.

   It really is about time that Icaza is told that he’s not wel­come any more and should STFU.

3. James Cape says:

   2007-10-02 at 5:30 am

   Miguel:

   I’ve not read the book either. I didn’t know there was one, honestly.

   Martin:

   1. You begin by refer­ring to GNOME in the sec­ond per­son — “you” — but drop the pro­nouns alto­gether when demand­ing Miguel be told (by “us”, I pre­sume) that he’s not wel­come any­more. Are you say­ing you want some­one ostri­cized from a group you’re not a part of?

   2. So far as I am aware, Planet GNOME is what­ever those who have been involved in GNOME — past and present — want to make it. It’s not a “project” any­thing, nor has it ever been. If Miguel’s mis­sives on the state of Israel’s behav­ior in the ter­ri­to­ries make it on http://​www​.gnome​.org, then you’ve got a complaint…

   3. Typically, demands that X be purged from the party take longer than 100 words. Otherwise people’s minds rebel at the abrupt shift. You would do well to remem­ber that in the future, Comrade Coxall.

4. iain says:

   2007-10-02 at 7:19 am

   “The expres­sion “Partisan pol­i­tics” usu­ally refers to fer­vent, some­times mil­i­tant sup­port of a party, cause, fac­tion, per­son, or idea.”

   Surely that is exactly what we want. People who are pas­sion­ate about the things they believe. The falecy that every­thing has to appeal to every­one and not offend or upset any­one is what has made the world a bland place.

   And I love the anti-israel == anti-semetic bull­shit from Mr Coxall. Still, same thing hap­pens with America. I dis­agree with peo­ple get­ting tasered for ask­ing the wrong ques­tions, so obvi­ously I just hate amer­ica. Makes per­fect sense. How can one hate a coun­try anyway?

5. Herman Bos says:

   2007-10-03 at 3:23 am

   We already do the same thing with­out any patching.

   Just cre­ate all the vlan devices in dom0 (eth0.2, eth0.342, etc.), put them each in a bridge (xenbr2, xenbr342, etc.) and then you can do the exact same. Decide in which VLAN the DomU lives.

   Basicly you just com­ment the (network-script ) thingy out com­pletely and con­fig­ure all the bridges and stuff in the dom0 system.

6. James Cape says:

   2007-10-03 at 7:18 pm

   That’s true, except that the RHEL 5 network-scripts fall apart when your “eth0” is actu­ally an active/passive 802.3ad “bond0,” and is built on top of sev­eral eth­er­net devices.

   In that case, your options are to either fix the RHEL 5 scripts, or write a cus­tom script to bring up all your inter­faces in the proper order. Using the “network-vlans” patch above, you sim­ply con­fig­ure your bond0 (which does work with the RHEL 5 scripts), and then just let XEN do it’s thing on top of that.

   Update: Let me rephrase the first para­graph: RHEL 5’s net­work scripts fall apart when you try to do a bridge on top of a dot1q on top of a bond­ing device on top of the real NICs, and make it come up on boot. In which case you’re going to be script­ing the startup any­ways, so why not just do a reg­u­lar bonded device and then let XEN’s net­work scripts do all the inter­face renam­ing and bridg­ing craziness.

7. Andy Shelley says:

   2007-10-22 at 2:02 pm

   In more recent RedHat updates, this patch spits out errors, appar­ently it seems because some of the changes were already incorporated.

   
*** network-bridge 2007-10-12 14:44:44.000000000 -0400
--- network-vlans 2007-10-22 13:06:20.000000000 -0400
***************
*** 27,32 ****
--- 27,33 ----
# bridge The bridge to use (default xenbr${vifnum}).
# netdev The interface to add to the bridge (default eth${vifnum}).
# antispoof Whether to use iptables to prevent spoofing (default no).
+ # vlans VLANs to add on top of the bridge
#
# Internal Vars:
# pdev="p${netdev}"
***************
*** 65,70 ****
--- 66,72 ----
bridge=${bridge:-xenbr${vifnum}}
netdev=${netdev:-eth${vifnum}}
antispoof=${antispoof:-no}
+ vlans=$(echo $vlans | sed -e 's/,/ /g')

   pdev=“p${netdev}“
vdev=“veth${vifnum}“
***************
*** 232,237 ****
 — 234,251 —-
add_to_bridge ${bridge} ${vif0}
add_to_bridge2 ${bridge} ${pdev}
do_ifup ${net­dev}
+
+ if [ –n “$vlans”] ]; then
+ vcon­fig set_name_type VLAN_PLUS_VID_NO_PAD
+
+ for vlan in $vlans; do
+ create_bridge xenbr${vlan}
+
+ vcon­fig add ${bridge} ${vlan}
+ setup_bridge_port vlan${vlan}
+ add_to_bridge xenbr${vlan} vlan${vlan}
+ done
+ fi
else
# old style with­out ${vdev}
transfer_addrs ${net­dev} ${bridge}
***************
*** 271,276 ****
 — 285,304 —-
ip link set ${net­dev} name ${vdev}
ip link set ${pdev} name ${net­dev}
do_ifup ${net­dev}
+
+ if [ –n “$vlans”] ]; then
+ for vlan in $vlans; do
+ if [ –n ‘ip link show vlan${vlan} | grep ‘${bridge}:’‘ ]; then
+ ip link delif ${bridge} xenbr${vlan}
+ ip link set ${bridge} down
+
+ ip link set vlan${vlan} down
+ vcon­fig rem ${bridge} ${vlan}
+ fi
+ done
+
+ vcon­fig set_name_type DEV_PLUS_VID_NO_PAD
+ fi
else
transfer_routes ${bridge} ${net­dev}
ip link set ${bridge} down


   Also, you don’t HAVE to leave dom0 on the native vlan. I’ve found that run­ning the new xen script with some­thing like:
   
network-vlans vlans=7,10 vifnum=0 netdev=bond0 start


   worked just fine, my local bond0.7 or bond0.10 inter­faces that were cre­ated with RedHat star­tups still func­tioned. However, it killed the local rout­ing table, neces­si­tat­ing re-doing that.

8. Andy Shelley says:

   2007-10-22 at 2:03 pm

   Pardon the for­mat­ting.. appar­ently I dropped a char­ac­ter somewhere.…

Leave a Reply Cancel reply