Re: [libvirt] 2 major proposals to enhance libvirt and its attractivity among developers & users
On 02.10.2016 15:11, jean-christophe Manciot wrote:
Hello everyone.
Hi,
Thank you for your points. I often think about this as I'm trying to
promote libvirt on every occasion.
Going straight to the point:
1) *add connection type: Docker*
This should not induce a lot of development since there is already an LXC
connection type.
Well, in fact I think this should be vice versa. Docker is using LXCs
but not through libvirt. And as much as I wish they had chosen to have
libvirt backend, they hadn't. I mean, docker is a management application
so in the stack it sits above libvirt. But on the other hand, one could
say that about ESX too, and we have a driver for that.
2) add the ability to *choose the bridge type of any virtual network*:
- Linux bridge
+ VPP : Cisco has recently open-sourced the virtual switch/router
<https://wiki.fd.io/view/VPP/What_is_VPP%3F> which it uses with DPDK as a
core part of some of its commercial virtual products. Its performance
should be unprecedented as compared to the current Linux bridge or even
OvS. "VPP is also applicable to many architectures (x86, ARM, and PowerPC)
and deployment environments (bare metal, VM, container)", according to
Simon Dredge in FD.io Takes Over VPP and Unites with DPDK to Accelerate NFV
Data Planes to Outright Nutty Speeds
<http://www.metaswitch.com/the-switch/fd.io-takes-over-vpp>;.
Interesting, haven't known about this one.
+ OvS: not a priority IMHO.
We do support OvS:
<interface type='bridge'>
<source bridge='ovsbr'/>
<virtualport type='openvswitch'/>
</interface>
Michal