On Mon, Jul 23, 2007 at 06:47:32PM +0530, Shuveb Hussain wrote:
Hi Daniel,
[...]
> Hum, yes that is different from all other implementations so far.
>
> But nameserver and hostname feels a bit misplaced. To me nameserver
> should go somewhere else, it's kind of a duplicate of the networking stuff.
> And what would happen if you have also IPv6, suddenly nameserver structure
> breaks. I don't know yet how to best fix this but those two are problematic
> as-is.
OpenVZ doesn't deal with any kind of devices anyways and since it is a
container system, I don't think it will do in the future either. There
only one kernel and the host and the guests and thus no device based
interfaces between them. Why not do away with the "devices" tag for
OpenVZ and rather do something like this:
<network>
<ipaddress>192.168.1.101</ipaddress>
<hostname>fc7-openvz</hostname>
<gateway>192.168.1.1</gateway>
</network>
What do you feel?
Right there is no devices so forget about reusing that structure block.
But then we should define another block similar in spirit something like
<domain>
.... common stuff ...
<container>
<filesystem>
...
</filesystem>
<network>
<ipaddress>192.168.1.101</ipaddress>
<hostname>fc7-openvz</hostname>
<gateway>192.168.1.1</gateway>
</network>
</container>
</domain>
The kind of descriptions are gonna be different from a device oriented
set since it's an user view and not an OS view anymore. One could argue
about the 'container' term but I guess it's adequate, it would fit to
chroot'ed
kind of setting, zones, VZ, basically virtualization techologies where the
Node (in libvirt terminology) exports the users ressources to the domain,
and not (just) devices. That would not prevent mixed approaches either.
Daniel
--
Red Hat Virtualization group
http://redhat.com/virtualization/
Daniel Veillard | virtualization library
http://libvirt.org/
veillard(a)redhat.com | libxml GNOME XML XSLT toolkit
http://xmlsoft.org/
http://veillard.com/ | Rpmfind RPM search engine
http://rpmfind.net/