On Thu, 2009-06-18 at 10:46 +0100, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
On Wed, Jun 17, 2009 at 10:59:20PM +0000, David Lutterkort wrote:
> On Wed, 2009-06-17 at 21:32 +0100, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
> > How do you deal with IPv6 currently ?
>
> With lots of Aspirin (actually, not at all)
>
> > I was thinking of sugesting an attribute
> >
> > <ip type="ipv6" address="2001:23::2"
prefix="24"/>
> >
> > but I think its possibly better to have a different element name
> >
> > <ip6 address="2001:23::2" prefix="24"/>
> >
> > since the former would not work if we ever needed to worry about
> > non-IP based addresses.
>
> Either works for me, with a slight preference for the first version, on
> purely esthetic grounds. And even if we go with that, there's nothing
> keeping us from adding an <ipx> element as an alternative to the <ip>
> element in the future.
Or a 3rd option is to group addresses by family
<addresses family='ipv4'>
<ip address='122.0.0.3' prefix='24'/>
<ip address='24.24.224.4' prefix='24'/>
</addresses>
<addresses family='ipv6'>
<ip address='2001:23::2' prefix='48'/>
<ip address='fe:33:55::33' prefix='64'/>
</addresses>
<adddresses family='ipx'>
<ipx address='2423.4521.66.3.252.'/>
</address>
I don't see that that buys us anything that we wouldn't have with
<ip type='ipv4' address='122.0.0.3' prefix='24'/>
<ip type='ipv4' address='24.24.224.4' prefix='24'/>
<ip type='ipv6' address='2001:23::2' prefix='48'/>
<ip type='ipv6' address='fe:33:55::33'
prefix='64'/>
<ipx address='2423.4521.66.3.252.'/>
_maybe_ enclosed in a <addresses> container tag, but I don't think
that's needed.
David