[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 Thu, 2009-06-18 at 18:10 +0100, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
> > I don't see that that buys us anything that we wouldn't have with
> > 
> >         <ip type='ipv4' address='122.0.0.3' prefix='24'/>
> >         <ip type='ipv4' address='24.24.224.4' prefix='24'/>
> >         <ip type='ipv6' address='2001:23::2' prefix='48'/>
> >         <ip type='ipv6' address='fe:33:55::33' prefix='64'/>
> >         <ipx address='2423.4521.66.3.252.'/>
> 
> If you do this, then you'll need an explicit element to turn on / off
> IPv4 or IPv6 addressing for the inteface as whole. ie to stop the
> automatic addition of a link-local address.

That should be stated explicitly, not implied by having an empty
<address/> tag.

> By having the container, for each family, the prescense or not of the
> container can define whether that address family is enabled for that
> inteface. 

What would 'enabling an address family for an interface' do ? Whatever
it does should probably be stated explicitly.

The one argument for <address> tags is that it makes it cleaner to
bundle addressing info like <ip> and routing info, to make sure that the
user doesn't specify ipv6 routes for an interface without ipv6
addresses.

David



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