David Edmondson wrote On 02/11/07 11:01 PM,:
>* Darren.Reed at Sun.COM [2007-02-12 00:16:07]
>
>
>>Can I change which physical interface a VNIC is backed by without
>>destroying/unpluming it?
>>
>>
>
>That's not possible today. It's not on the feature list for Nevada
>putback either.
>
>
yep.
thus far, the physical NIC has been viewed as a defining property of the
VNIC,
and, unlike other attributes, don't change.
Now with Clearview link vanity naming, one could consider associating
the bandwidth,
MAC address, etc ...) attributes to the user-chosen link name, and not
the underlying MAC (phys. or virt.) device.
In that case, when the name is re-assigned to a different MAC thing, it
is intuitive that the attributes
follow.
But then, if we view the link name as just an alias for the link, then
none of the attributes would be
carried forward when the name is reassigned to designate another link.
A similar question could actually be asked about other components that
use the link name,
such as IPsec policies, or IPFiler rules.
Kais.
>dme.
>
>
(text of original question from Darren Reed)
Darren.Reed at sun.com wrote On 02/11/07 04:16 PM,:
> Can I change which physical interface a VNIC is backed by
> without destroying/unpluming it?
>
> If I can do that and I change the physical interface a VNIC is
> backed by, do all of the resource controls (descriptors, bandwidth
> limits, etc) carry forward or do they need to be re-established?
