Bridge Networking is too difficult to implement

[ToddAndMargo]

Hi All,

First off, I do not need help with bridge networking: I figured it out. It took me six months, but I figured it out.

Which brings me to the problem: “Bridge Networking” is too difficult to implement. The “Developers” need to come up with a method of implementing Bridge Networking that is no more difficult to implement than any of the other networking options.

VM Ware can do it. Buggy, miserable Parallels for Linux can do it. There is no reason why it can not be done in Virtual Box.

Other than that, Virtual Box is a fantastic piece of code!

Many thanks, -T

[markba]

I second this. It didn't took me 6 month, but I also invested a considerable amount of time.

[Tyler]

I agree. As a developer, I should take the time to master this kinda stuff. However, grinding my gears over the last few days & I just tossed in the towel. I'm going back to VMware, I'll check back on VirtualBox later.

[Jerome Haltom]

Just wanted to add my implementation suggestions.

Right now it's hard because VirtualBox doesn't actually implement it. It relies on the kernel's support for tap devices, and the amazing stuff you an do with that: briding included.

The *real* problem, the one that should be fixed, is that it's hard to create a bridge interface on the Gnome and/or KDE desktop. This should be made easier. If it is, adding functionality to vbox becomes a non-issue.

Network-manager should be able to configure new tap and bridge devices in some fashion through PolicyKit. If you solve this, you remove any need for vbox to do anything.

[Frank Mehnert]

VBox 2.1.0 changes the host networking completely. You can now directly attach to an host interface.