[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]

Re: [netcf-devel] [libvirt] [RFC] Reporting host interface status/statistics via netcf/libvirt, and listing active vs. inactive interfaces



On Wed, Jun 17, 2009 at 01:27:14PM -0700, David Lutterkort wrote:
> On Wed, 2009-06-17 at 22:10 +0200, Daniel Veillard wrote:
> > On Wed, Jun 17, 2009 at 09:03:32PM +0100, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
> > > On Wed, Jun 17, 2009 at 09:42:11PM +0200, Daniel Veillard wrote:
> > > > On Wed, Jun 17, 2009 at 12:22:13PM -0700, David Lutterkort wrote:
> > > > > On Wed, 2009-06-17 at 19:24 +0100, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
> > > > > > IP address information should be in the XML, and indeed surely it is 
> > > > > > already there in order to allow non-DHCP  based IP address config
> > > > > > on interfaces ?
> > > > > 
> > > > > Yes, for statically configured interfaces, the IP information is in the
> > > > > XML - that is the _configured_ IP info though, not necessarily the one
> > > > > that the interface actually uses. The two can diverge, for example, if
> > > > > an interface is already up and then reconfigured.
> > > > 
> > > >   BTW I was looking at the Relax-NG grammar and found the following
> > > > confusing when providing an IP address:
> > > > 
> > > >         <element name="ip">
> > > >           <optional>
> > > >             <attribute name="address"><ref name="ip-mask"/></attribute>
> > > >           </optional>
> > > >         </element>
> > > > 
> > > > I'm not really sure what ip-mask really means, are you trying to
> > > > put in a single attribute both the IP address and the netmask ?
> > > > If that's the case I would really suggest to split the two as separated
> > > > IP and netmask in the XML structure, either separate attributes or
> > > > another element for the netmask. Best to us the explicit structure of
> > > > XML than a construct hidden inside the text field, unless I
> > > > misunderstood the use case...
> > > 
> > > 'netmask' should really be avoided these days, in preference to 'prefix'
> > > since the latter works for IPv4 and IPv6, while the former only works
> > > for IPv4. 'netmask' can be auto-calculated from 'prefix' by apps if they
> > > really care about it.
> > 
> >   Fine by me, just that I think they should be hold by 2 separate
> > attributes or element if possible at this point.
> 
> Yes, good point; and I don't know what I was thinking when I made the
> address attribute optional.
> 
> I'll change the schema to this:
> 
>         <element name="ip">
>           <attribute name="address"><ref name="ip-addr"/></attribute>
>           <attribute name="prefix"><ref name="prefix-pattern"/></attribute>
>         </element>
> 
> so that you'll write
> 
>         <ip address="172.32.12.10" prefix="24"/>

ACK, that  gets my vote.


> I haven't declared the schema or the API stable yet, but I want to do
> that once there is a libvirt release out there that relies on netcf. So
> if there are any other issues with any of these aspects, raise them now
> or forever hold your peace.

How do you deal with IPv6  currently ?

I was thinking of sugesting an attribute

  <ip type="ipv6" address="2001:23::2" prefix="24"/>

but I think its possibly better to have a different element name

  <ip6 address="2001:23::2" prefix="24"/>

since the former would not work if we ever needed to worry about
non-IP based addresses.


Daniel
-- 
|: Red Hat, Engineering, London   -o-   http://people.redhat.com/berrange/ :|
|: http://libvirt.org  -o-  http://virt-manager.org  -o-  http://ovirt.org :|
|: http://autobuild.org       -o-         http://search.cpan.org/~danberr/ :|
|: GnuPG: 7D3B9505  -o-  F3C9 553F A1DA 4AC2 5648 23C1 B3DF F742 7D3B 9505 :|


[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]