KVM, virtual router, vlan. How right?

Question

KVM

I welcome everyone.
I have been using a FreeBSD-based virtual router (R) for about two years, all services (S) are also virtual machines on the same host (proxmox) as the router. There are about 400 clients on the network. On eth1, connected by a bridge, tagged traffic from the switch comes to R, service virtual machines are also connected through bridges to ethN that go to the switch. Everything works, everything suits.
We got a new server, we have to move. I thought, since R and S are on the same host, why organize their interaction through additional switching, i.e.:
1. a request comes from the switch to S from the client vlan on R
2. the request is routed and goes to the switch
3. it comes from the switch to S
(I hope I explained clearly), why the last two steps, i.e. R in virtualization, but organized as if it were on a separate host.
I think how to do it:
- combine all available physical interfaces into a bond and connect to R, S connect to R through empty bridges.
- combine all available physical interfaces into bond and connect to R, S connect to R via openv switch.
- leave everything as it is.
Here are a few questions:
1. Is it correct to connect vlan trunk through the bridge directly to R or resolve all vlan to bridges and connect to R?
2. How much more productive is openv switch and will it increase the load on the CPU (I don’t know about performance, but it will increase the load, because, roughly speaking, another layer between the hypervisor and the linux bridge)?
Thanks to all.

Answer 1

IMHO, leave it as it is, your load is not "to the ceiling", and if the number of services grows and you want to install a second server, then in the current scheme this will be the easiest to do.