[Engine-devel] Bridgeless Networks api design

[Itamar Heim]

On 03/15/2012 12:53 PM, Michael Pasternak wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> First of all i would like to understand the exact meaning of the vm_network,
> from the wiki [1] - "a "Vm network" is implemented over a bridge, otherwise bridgeless",
>
> if so, why not calling network property<bridged>true|false</bridged>?

bridge vs. bridgeless is an implementation detail. some network models 
could run without a bridge as well for VMs (though not currently supported).
so the optimization is to not use a bridge for networks that can't run 
VMs, but the reverse logic does not apply.

>
> from the other hand i understand that this is only current implementation and it
> may change in a future,
>
> anyway adding<vm_network>true|false</vm_network>  property to<network>  entity in api
> (as was suggested) doesn't sound good cause vm_network sounds as a network type, but then
> the question is Management/Migration/Storage/Display should be also network's types? and if single
> network can be used for the Management|Migration|Storage|Display simultaneously? if the answer is
> yes, network modelling probably should look like:
>
> <network>
>    <bridged>true|false</bridged>
>    <type>Management/Migration/Storage/Display</type>
> </network>
>
> or
>
> <network>
>    <bridged>true|false</bridged>
>    <designation>Management|Migration|Storage|Display</designation>
> </network>

that bridged should be replaced with something saying VM_Network (better 
name needed).
btw, I wonder if a private network (only for one vm) is also a type, or 
just a private case of a vm network.

and that type/designation can have more than one of course.
(and that migration/storage networks are still not supported).

>
> your thoughts?
>
> [1] http://www.ovirt.org/wiki/Features/Design/Network/Bridgeless_Networks
>