Re: [netcf-devel] [libvirt] [RFC] Reporting host interface status/statistics via netcf/libvirt, and listing active vs. inactive interfaces

On Wed, Jun 17, 2009 at 01:27:14PM -0700, David Lutterkort wrote: > On Wed, 2009-06-17 at 22:10 +0200, Daniel Veillard wrote: > > On Wed, Jun 17, 2009 at 09:03:32PM +0100, Daniel P. Berrange wrote: > > > On Wed, Jun 17, 2009 at 09:42:11PM +0200, Daniel Veillard wrote: > > > > On Wed, Jun 17, 2009 at 12:22:13PM -0700, David Lutterkort wrote: > > > > > On Wed, 2009-06-17 at 19:24 +0100, Daniel P. Berrange wrote: > > > > > > IP address information should be in the XML, and indeed surely it is > > > > > > already there in order to allow non-DHCP based IP address config > > > > > > on interfaces ? > > > > > > > > > > Yes, for statically configured interfaces, the IP information is in the > > > > > XML - that is the _configured_ IP info though, not necessarily the one > > > > > that the interface actually uses. The two can diverge, for example, if > > > > > an interface is already up and then reconfigured. > > > > > > > > BTW I was looking at the Relax-NG grammar and found the following > > > > confusing when providing an IP address: > > > > > > > > <element name="ip"> > > > > <optional> > > > > <attribute name="address"><ref name="ip-mask"/></attribute> > > > > </optional> > > > > </element> > > > > > > > > I'm not really sure what ip-mask really means, are you trying to > > > > put in a single attribute both the IP address and the netmask ? > > > > If that's the case I would really suggest to split the two as separated > > > > IP and netmask in the XML structure, either separate attributes or > > > > another element for the netmask. Best to us the explicit structure of > > > > XML than a construct hidden inside the text field, unless I > > > > misunderstood the use case... > > > > > > 'netmask' should really be avoided these days, in preference to 'prefix' > > > since the latter works for IPv4 and IPv6, while the former only works > > > for IPv4. 'netmask' can be auto-calculated from 'prefix' by apps if they > > > really care about it. > > > > Fine by me, just that I think they should be hold by 2 separate > > attributes or element if possible at this point. > > Yes, good point; and I don't know what I was thinking when I made the > address attribute optional. > > I'll change the schema to this: > > <element name="ip"> > <attribute name="address"><ref name="ip-addr"/></attribute> > <attribute name="prefix"><ref name="prefix-pattern"/></attribute> > </element> > > so that you'll write > > <ip address="172.32.12.10" prefix="24"/> Cool :-) > I haven't declared the schema or the API stable yet, but I want to do > that once there is a libvirt release out there that relies on netcf. So > if there are any other issues with any of these aspects, raise them now > or forever hold your peace. Well I'm writing the parser, so sure I will raise those :-) There is also a lot of suggested extensions from Jim Fehlig, but I think they all can be handled as extension from the original schemas. One thing which needs to be ironed out IMHO is IPv6, better clean this up now than later. I'm not a IPv6 fan but making sure the schemas is ready for it is important I guess. The comment about <dhcp6 /> should probably be decided before first release.