On Mon, Jan 15, 2007 at 08:53:43PM +0000, Mark McLoughlin wrote:
Hi, One thing which is relevant to Dan's authentication stuff ...
On Mon, 2007-01-15 at 20:06 +0000, Mark McLoughlin wrote:
* Since virConnect is supposed to be a connection to a specific hypervisor, does it make sense to create networks (which should be hypervisor agnostic) through virConnect?
Personally, I think virConnect should be little more than a library context through which you access all hypervisors at once. In practical terms, the XML describing a domain is what chooses which hypervisor to connect to - e.g. all apps should pass NULL to virConnectOpen() and all drivers should handle NULL.
Having a single virConnectOpen which initializes all backends is not going to fly because it'll create a huge namespace clash. eg, the names passed to virConnectLookupByName are only unique per-hypervisor connection - its perfectly valid to have a Xen domain called 'foo' and a QEMU domain called 'foo' on the same machine. Similarly the integer IDs are scoped per hypervisor, and the UUIDs are unique only per-hypervisor, etc, etc. The entire API is modelled on the idea of one virConnectPtr object representing the context of a single hypervisor. Dan. -- |=- Red Hat, Engineering, Emerging Technologies, Boston. +1 978 392 2496 -=| |=- Perl modules: http://search.cpan.org/~danberr/ -=| |=- Projects: http://freshmeat.net/~danielpb/ -=| |=- GnuPG: 7D3B9505 F3C9 553F A1DA 4AC2 5648 23C1 B3DF F742 7D3B 9505 -=|