At first glance it wasn't obvious why there was the possibility for more
than one switch.
Signed-off-by: Ben Pfaff <b...@nicira.com>
---
vtep/vtep.xml | 17 ++++++++++++++++-
1 file changed, 16 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/vtep/vtep.xml b/vtep/vtep.xml
index cf6bf74..80fc99d 100644
--- a/vtep/vtep.xml
+++ b/vtep/vtep.xml
@@ -36,7 +36,22 @@
exactly one record in the <ref table="Global"/> table.
<column name="switches">
- The physical switches managed by the VTEP.
+ <p>
+ The physical switch or switches managed by the VTEP.
+ </p>
+
+ <p>
+ When a physical switch integrates support for this VTEP schema, which
+ is expected to be the most common case, this column should point to one
+ <ref table="Physical_Switch"/> record that represents the switch
+ itself. In another possible implementation, a server or a VM presents
+ a VTEP schema front-end interface to one or more physical switches,
+ presumably communicating with those physical switches over a
+ proprietary protocol. In that case, this column would point to one
+ <ref table="Physical_Switch"/> for each physical switch, and the set
+ might change over time as the front-end server comes to represent a
+ differing set of switches.
+ </p>
</column>
<group title="Database Configuration">
--
1.7.10.4
_______________________________________________
dev mailing list
dev@openvswitch.org
http://openvswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/dev
