On 11/21/2012 10:53 PM, Andrew Cathrow wrote:
> ----- Original Message -----
>> From: "Moti Asayag" <masayag(a)redhat.com>
>> To: engine-devel(a)ovirt.org
>> Sent: Wednesday, November 21, 2012 12:36:58 PM
>> Subject: [Engine-devel] Report vNic Implementation Details
>> Hi all,
>> This is a proposal for reporting the vNic implementation details as
>> reported by the guest agent per each vNic.
>> Please review the wiki and add your comments.
> While we're making the change is there anything else we'd want to
> report - MTU, MAC (since a user might try to override), etc ?
iirc, the fact ip addresses appear under guest info in the api and not
under the vnic was a modeling decision.
for example, what if guest is using a bridge, or a bond (yes, sounds
unlikely, but the point is it may be incorrect to assume ip-vnic relation.
michael - do you remember the details of that discussion?
I'd love to know what drove this modeling decision.
The use case above is not a typical use case.
We know we won't be able to present the guest internal network
configuration accurately in some scenarios but if we cover 90% of the
use cases correctly I think we should not let perfect be the enemy of
(very) good ;)
Engine-devel mailing list