On 08/18/2012 12:06 AM, Bill Campbell wrote: > I got things installed yesterday, adding a routed network section > using virt-manager linked to the private interface, eth1. I left > the default NAT interface as-is. > > After rebooting the machine, two bridge devices, virbr0 and > virbr1 appear in 'ifconfig' output with the appropriate IP > addresses (192.168.122.1 and 192.168.100.1 respectively). > > The 'route -n' command shows reasonable routes for the VMs. > > I am thoroughly confused by the documentation I've found so far, > much of which seems to be out of date. > > When the Windows VM is active with the network virbr1 defined > with virt-manager and all other things default, a 'vmnet0' device > appears in 'ifconfig' output. I can ping the IPs on the private > lan (192.168.101.0/24 in this case), but cannot get to the > outside world, nor can hosts on the LAN ping the VM's assigned IP > address 192.168.100.114. > > If I shut down the VM, manually run 'brctl addif virbr1 eth1', then start > the VM things change: > > + The IP address assigned to the VM is in the 192.168.101.0/24 block > instead of 192.168.100.0/24 defined in virt-manager. > > + I can ping the outside world from the VM. > > + I can ping other hosts in 192.168.101.0/24, but*NOT* the Linux boxes > IP address. > > + I cannot ping anything in 192.168.101.0/24 from the command line on > the Linux host (logged in with ssh on the public interface). > > + The command 'brctl show' displays vmnet0 and eth1 vir virbr1. > > I'm more than a bit confused at this point. > > My main goal is to get LAN and OpenVPN access to the Windows VM. > I really don't care about Internet access from the Windows VM, > although Microsoft really wants it to get updates and such. Do you have iptables enabled? If so add a rule for the bridge as well.