On Fri, 2007-03-09 at 03:03 +0000, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
Anyway, we now have two different syntaxes in the XML for defining
what
is more or less the same thing which is a real PITA for the tools. It
is useful to have the distinct representations - one is for 'managed'
bridges, and the other is for 'unmanaged' bridges - we can do some much
more interesting things with managed bridges.
As I said in another mail, the way I'd imagined virt-install working
would be that by default it would connect guest NICs to the default
network (i.e. not the bridge associated with the default network), but
you could still use --bridge to explicitly connect the guest to a
bridge. And we'd have a --network option.
To improve life for the tools though I'd like to do two things as
a high
priority
- Support managed networks in Xen - we can simply lookup the bridge
device associated with a network and tell Xen to use vif-bridge with
this device.
We already have this in libvirt. See virDomainParseXMLIfDesc()
For the reverse Xen will tell us what bridge device a
guest is using, and we can reverse lookup the corresponding network
I'm not sure why you want this?
- Support non-managed networks in QEMU - we can simply enslave the
QEMU tap device to an arbitrary user specific bridge device.
Yes, we should definitely have this.
Cheers,
Mark.