On Tue, Jan 26, 2016 at 1:44 AM, Patrick O'Callaghan
On Mon, 2016-01-25 at 23:54 +0100, Tom H wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 25, 2016 at 5:52 PM, Patrick O'Callaghan
> <pocallaghan(a)gmail.com> wrote:
>> I figured it out (sort of). Turns out I'm running a virtual bridge
>> network for VirtualBox on virbr0, and it was sitting on the port for
>> some reason. Still not sure why but when I shit down that network it
>> all started to work.
> I'm not familiar with VirtualBox. Is virbr0 created (and used) by
> VirtualBox? Or did you create it manually?
I believe it was created by VBox.
I installed VirtualBox on two laptops (albeit running Ubuntu; I have
Fedora and Ubuntu on my laptop but I don't want to install VirtualBox
on either) and no br or tap device were created. I doubt that virbr0
would be created by VirtualBox on Fedor and not on Ubuntu.
Furthermore, I doubt that VirtualBox would name its bridge virbr0,
given that it's part of the libvirt "namespace" and that their
respective default NAT setups use different ip ranges.
> Or do you have libvirt installed (it's the default libvirt
I do, though nothing seems to depend on it. libvirtd is running,
presumably as part of the standard KVM system, but AFAIK that's
independent of VBox.
If you're running libvirt, then it's providing virbr0.
Unless you've changed the default, you can confirm this with "virsh
net-dumpxml default | grep bridge".