The following config elements now support a <vlan> subelements:
within a domain: <interface>, and the <actual> subelement of <interface>
within a network: the toplevel, as well as any <portgroup>
Each vlan element must have one or more <tag id='n'/> subelements. If
there is more than one tag, it is assumed that vlan trunking is being
requested. If trunking is required with only a single tag, the
attribute "trunk='yes'" should be added to the toplevel <vlan>
element.
Some examples:
<interface type='hostdev'/>
<vlan>
<tag id='42'/>
</vlan>
<mac address='52:54:00:12:34:56'/>
...
</interface>
<network>
<name>vlan-net</name>
<vlan trunk='yes'>
<tag id='30'/>
</vlan>
<virtualport type='openvswitch'/>
</network>
<interface type='network'/>
<source network='vlan-net'/>
...
</interface>
<network>
<name>trunk-vlan</name>
<vlan>
<tag id='42'/>
<tag id='43'/>
</vlan>
...
</network>
<network>
<name>multi</name>
...
<portgroup name='production'/>
<vlan>
<tag id='42'/>
</vlan>
</portgroup>
<portgroup name='test'/>
<vlan>
<tag id='666'/>
</vlan>
</portgroup>
</network>
<interface type='network'/>
<source network='multi' portgroup='test'/>
...
</interface>
IMPORTANT NOTE: As of this patch there is no backend support for the
vlan element for *any* network device type. When support is added in
later patches, it will only be for those select network types that
support setting up a vlan on the host side, without the guest's
involvement. (For example, it will be possible to configure a vlan for
a guest connected to an openvswitch bridge, but it won't be possible
to do that for one that is connected to a standard Linux host bridge.)
The network XML is updated in the following ways:
1) The <forward> element can now contain a list of forward interfaces:
<forward .... >
<interface dev='eth10'/>
<interface dev='eth11'/>
<interface dev='eth12'/>
<interface dev='eth13'/>
</forward>
The first of these takes the place of the dev attribute that is
normally in <forward> - when defining a network you can specify
either one, and on output both will be present. If you specify
both on input, they must match.
2) In addition to forward modes of 'nat' and 'route', these new modes
are supported:
private, passthrough, vepa - when this network is referenced by a
domain's interface, it will have the same effect as if the
interface had been defined as type='direct', e.g.:
<interface type='direct'>
<source mode='${mode}' dev='${dev}>
...
</interface>
where ${mode} is one of the three new modes, and ${dev} is an interface
selected from the list given in <forward>.
bridge - if a <forward> dev (or multiple devs) is defined, and
forward mode is 'bridge' this is just like the modes 'private',
'passthrough', and 'vepa' above. If there is no forward dev
specified but a bridge name is given (e.g. "<bridge
name='br0'/>"), then guest interfaces using this network will use
libvirt's "host bridge" mode, equivalent to this:
<interface type='bridge'>
<source bridge='${bridge-name}'/>
...
</interface>
3) A network can have multiple <portgroup> elements, which may be
selected by the guest interface definition (by adding
"portgroup='${name}'" in the <source> element along with the
network name). Currently a portgroup can only contain a
virtportprofile, but the intent is that other configuration items
may be put there int the future (e.g. bandwidth config). When
building a guest's interface, if the <interface> XML itself has no
virtportprofile, and if the requested network has a portgroup with
a name matching the name given in the <interface> (or if one of the
network's portgroups is marked with the "default='yes'" attribute),
the virtportprofile from that portgroup will be used by the
interface.
4) A network can have a virtportprofile defined at the top level,
which will be used by a guest interface when connecting in one of
the 'direct' modes if the guest interface XML itself hasn't
specified any virtportprofile, and if there are also no matching
portgroups on the network.
