On Fri, 2009-01-16 at 01:26 +0000, John Levon wrote:
On Fri, Jan 16, 2009 at 01:13:18AM +0000, David Lutterkort wrote:
> * Should this even be done as part of libvirt ? It seems like a very
> generic network config tool, and libvirt merely the conduit to exposing
> this through an API, most importantly, a remotable API.
My humble opinion would be "no". This argument equally applies to
everything you could configure on a host, and I don't think anyone wants
to turn libvirt into libmanagement. Would it be feasible for libvirtd to
have a 'passthrough' mode that feeds unknown stuff off to some other
daemon?
Especially in this case - interface management is very complex as you
note.
I am not disagreeing with you, but either way, libvirt needs _some_ way
to control host interfaces. And seeing how there are no tools that do
something like the above in a portable way, it seems worthwhile, too.
The question is probably more whether some of this functionality should
be split out in a way that can be used independenty of libvirt.
David