<div dir="ltr">I am thinking about how to make this more useful to the masses on the team. The question I am asking myself is "can it replace vagrant for some scenarios". For example, being able to spin up a Satellite + Capsule(s) with DHCP, DNS etc. but allow outside access to the server via a web browser. Since often the setup requires a beefy box that is running on a beaker machine or server under a desk and developers use their laptops to access.<div><br></div><div><br></div><div>Eric</div></div><div class="gmail_extra"><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Tue, Mar 8, 2016 at 9:42 AM, Barak Korren <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:bkorren@redhat.com" target="_blank">bkorren@redhat.com</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><span class="">On 8 March 2016 at 15:13, Eric Helms <<a href="mailto:ehelms@redhat.com">ehelms@redhat.com</a>> wrote:<br>
> I couldn't find anything in the documentation so asking here, is there a way<br>
> to setup bridge networking for a set of VMs to get them public IPs?<br>
><br>
<br>
</span>You can setup an unmanaged network, and then use brctl after 'lago<br>
init' to attach a public interface to the bridge it creates.<br>
But if you need that you are not using Lago the way it was meant to be<br>
used, network isolation was baked in on purpose.<br>
Why do you need this?<br>
<span class="HOEnZb"><font color="#888888"><br>
<br>
<br>
--<br>
Barak Korren<br>
<a href="mailto:bkorren@redhat.com">bkorren@redhat.com</a><br>
RHEV-CI Team<br>
</font></span></blockquote></div><br></div>