On 02/15/2012 11:34 AM, Roy Golan wrote:
----- Original Message -----
From: "Yaniv Kaul"<ykaul@redhat.com> To: "Roy Golan"<rgolan@redhat.com> Cc: engine-devel@ovirt.org Sent: Monday, February 6, 2012 5:10:16 PM Subject: Re: [Engine-devel] bridgless networks
Hi All
Lately I've been working on a design of bridge-less network feature in the engine. You can see it in http://www.ovirt.org/wiki/Features/Design/Network/Bridgeless_Networks#Bridge...
Please review the design. Note, there are some open issues, you can find in the relevant section. Reviews and comments are very welcome.
Thanks, Roy _______________________________________________ Engine-devel mailing list Engine-devel@ovirt.org http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/engine-devel
On 02/06/2012 04:47 PM, Roy Golan wrote: 0. Fixed some typos in the wiki. There are others I couldn't understand. 1. "Also looking forward a capable of running VMs nics should be bridged on regular nics and un-bridged in case of dedicated special nics" - don't understand what it means (English-wise too). correct, the phrasing is bad. I meant that when we are doing the actual attach, should we implicitly choose not to create a bridge on vNic or SRIOV ? Anyway for now the best and fastest approach I think is to give freedom of choice - the user will choose if the network should be bridged or not during the attach.
2. "UI shall user shall" . 3. Not sure the REST API is complete. How is the property set on the logical network (upon creation or later) ? please see my former post. I suggest we won't have this property on the logical network at all. 4. So, if there's no bridge on my bond, can I now use the bond methods that are incompatible with bridges and therefore we did not allow them until now? why not? is VDSM blocking those?
Either UI or engine do not show bond modes that are incompatible with bridges. Perhaps it's not a limitation we need to worry about. Y.
Y.