On Fri, Jan 5, 2018 at 7:44 AM, Dan Kenigsberg <danken@redhat.com> wrote:
On Thu, Jan 4, 2018 at 5:50 AM, Sam McLeod <mailinglists@smcleod.net> wrote:
> I'm having a problem where when setting up hosted engine deployment it fails
> stating that the selected bond name is bad.
>
> "code=25, message=bad bond name(s): mgmt)"
>
> - Is there a problem similar to
> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1519807 that's known?

Please note that this is just but one bug in a series/tree of
related bugs, some of which are open. If you decide to follow
Dan's suggestion, perhaps reuse one of the others, or perhaps
even better - open a new one, and eventually one or more will
be closed as duplicate of one or more of the others. Sadly,
not all of them link properly to each other, and at least one
which was fixed caused another bug, so the fix was reverted.
See also e.g. all of the discussion in:

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1459229

 
> - If it seems to be this bug, is it preferred that I simply update the
> existing, closed issue as I have done, or open a new bug?
>
> --
> Sam McLeod
> https://smcleod.net
> https://twitter.com/s_mcleod

I see that you are trying to use a bond interface named "mgmt".
To avoid confusion while debugging a system, Vdsm has opted to allow
only bond names starting with "bond" followed by one or more decimal
digits. Anything else is considered "bad bond".

I prefer keeping the "bond" prefix compulsory, but I'd like to hear
why using different names is useful.

You can reopen this bug, but please move it to vdsm and rename it: it
should be something like "Allow any bondXYZ name for bonds" or "Allow
any bond name" and explain there why it is a good idea.

Dominik, is there an Engine-side limitation on bond names?
_______________________________________________
Users mailing list
Users@ovirt.org
http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/users



--
Didi