Re: [libvirt] [PATCH v5] ESX: Add routines to interface driver

Date: Sun, 5 Aug 2012 22:45:26 +0200 Subject: Re: [libvirt] [PATCH v5] ESX: Add routines to interface driver From: matthias.bolte(a)googlemail.com To: ata.husain(a)hotmail.com CC: libvir-list(a)redhat.com 2012/8/5 Matthias Bolte <matthias.bolte(a)googlemail.com&gt;: > 2012/8/2 Ata E Husain Bohra <ata.husain(a)hotmail.com&gt;: >> Add following routines to esx_interface_driver: >> esxNumOfInterfaces, >> esxNumOfDefinedInterfaces, >> esxListInterfaces, >> esxListDefinedInterfaces, >> esxInterfaceLookupByMACString, >> esxInterfaceGetXMLDesc, >> esxInterfaceUndefine, >> esxInterfaceCreate, >> esxInterfaceDestroy >> >> Signed-off-by: Ata E Husain Bohra <ata.husain(a)hotmail.com&gt; > > Okay, I finally had time to take a detailed look at the interface > driver and the related network driver and your proposed implementation > for the interface driver. > > I think listing HostVirtualNics in the interface driver is not the > correct mapping between vSphere API and libvirt. Also listing > HostVirtualNics as bridges is not correct because a HostVirtualNic is > not a bridge. A HostVirtualSwitch can be seen as a kind of bridge, but > a HostVirtualSwitch is more like a virtual network in libvirt terms. > > In terms of libvirt the interface driver is about physical NICs that > can be used to connect a libvirt virtual network to the physical > network. Therefore, the interface driver should just list the > PhysicalNics, but not the HostVirtualNics. I think there is currently > no place in the libvirt API to map the HostVirtualNics to. Also I > don't think that it is important to make the HostVirtualNics available > via libvirt API. I might be wrong here, but mapping them via libvirt > interface driver is still wrong in my opinion. > > Regarding the network driver, I think a libvirt virtual network is > best represented by a HostVirtualSwitch and the HostPortGroups are > mapped to the portgroups of a libvirt virtual switch. > > I'm sorry that I let you wait for quite a while now until I came to > this understanding that is contrary to your proposed interface driver. I missed to mention that I proposed an implementation for the interface and network drivers according to the described mapping: https://www.redhat.com/archives/libvir-list/2012-August/msg00307.html https://www.redhat.com/archives/libvir-list/2012-August/msg00308.html -- Matthias Bolte http://photron.blogspot.com