Re: [libvirt] RFC: configuring host interfaces with libvirt

[John Levon <levon movementarian org>]

On Fri, Jan 16, 2009 at 01:41:19PM +0000, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:

> > I don't think that's much of an argument. Plenty of things can be
> > considered fundamental. My kernel version certainly is, so why isn't
> > libvirt letting me upgrade that? What about my firewall? Why isn't
> > libvirt configuring my iSCSI target for me?
> 
> The kernel version isn't fundamental to the task of provisioning and
> configuring a guest VM. When deploying a VM there is no general
> requirement to upgrade the host kernel. When deploying a VM there
> very much is a requirement to configure physical resources in the 
> host such as storage, and networking.

So it sounds like you think libvirt /should/ be going out and
configuring shared storage. What about VLAN set up on my router
hardware? That too, right?

> The existance of many different impls is exactly the reason for libvirt
> to have this capability. Libvirt is providing a consistent mgmt API

No - it's exactly the reason for SOME common API. No-one is arguing that
a common API for host networking is a bad idea.

"There isn't an API, and it's sometimes needed for management" is not an
argument for it be part of libvirt's scope.

Again, what makes libvirt a good place for this management? I don't
accept "because it's there" as a reasonable justification...

regards,
john