good, waiting for your results.
Some results, or to be more precise, different config settings between MetaROUTER and KVM.
Janis! correct me if I'm wrong about my assumptions and conclusions.
I'm trying to understand the different configurations based on my Linux knowledge and how-to configuring tun/tap, vlan and bridges in Linux OS.
When creating static interfaces in MetaROUTER, you can select physical interfaces like Ether1.
The selection list on KVM show only the interfaces already added as Virtual Ethernet interfaces. (/interface virtual-ethernet)
In MR, if I use a physical (not configured on the host) interface in a guest and add VLAN on that interface on the guest, the VLANs works.
To do the same thing in KVM I need to create a bridge with a tap interface and the physical interface I want to bind it to.
The tap interface is the interface that is attached to the guest.
If I create the same configuration in MR with a bridge between a physical and virtual and the vif attached to the guest, all interfaces stops responding.
I have arp in the guest and the bridge host table looks alright, but the guest is not responding.
The difference between the configuration of virtual ethernet interfaces, is that in KVM you can assign MAC-address on both host and guest side, but not in MR.
If I, in MR, change from static to dynamic and assign the interface to the same bridge it all starts working again. And now, it assigns a MAC-address on the host side.
From Winbox (2.2.18) I can add and view Virtual Ethernet interfaces in KVM, but not in MR.
Is the MetaROUTER paravirtualization or just a software on the hosts that emulates a ROS?
More to come.....