I am worried not only by the API.json changes but also in the potential backend changes required. Do you have any prediction of how far these changes might go? On 08/09/2016 06:12 AM, Suresh Babu Angadi wrote:
Hi All, To support, attaching a physical interface to guest as macvtap or attaching ovs bridge to guest without creating libvirt network, I propose following changes to 'networks' attribute of templates josn.
current implementation: 'networks' attribute expects list of virtual network names
changes: 'networks': list of dictionary type: can be direct, network or bridge interface: name of physical interface(type=direct) or ovs (type=bridge) or virtual network(type=direct) mode(required if type=direct): bridge or vepa
for macvtap: type is direct and mode can be bridge or vepa for ovs: type is bridge and mode is not required for virtual network: type=network(current implementation)
Examples of network xml for attaching macvtap and ovs to guest without libvirt: OVS: <interface type="bridge"> <source bridge="vswitch0"/> <virtualport type="openvswitch"/> <model type="virtio"/> </interface>
macvtap with bridge mode: <interface type="direct"> <source dev="eth0" mode="bridge"/> <model type="virtio"/> </interface>
macvtap with vepa mode: <interface type="direct"> <source dev="bond0" mode="vepa"/> <model type="virtio"/> </interface>