On Sun, Aug 17, 2014 at 01:43:59PM +0300, Yevgeny Zaspitsky wrote: > > On 15/08/14 12:55, Dan Kenigsberg wrote: > >On Thu, Aug 14, 2014 at 11:52:41AM -0400, Yevgeny Zaspitsky wrote: > >>Hi All, > >> > >>The proposed feature will allow defining an arbitrary network in the DC as > >>the management network for the cluster, which in its turn will allow > >>assigning different VLANs for the management networks in the same DC. > >> > >>Feature page can be found here - > >>http://www.ovirt.org/Features/Management_Network_As_A_Role . > >> > >>Please take a look into the page especially into "Open issues" section. I'd > >>like to have your opinions on that. > >May I ask why you change the default management network from ovirtmgmt > >to "Management"? (And why the upercase M?) > We'd like to get rid of that difference between oVirt and REVM. IMHO there's > no good reason for having product name in the network/bridge name. > If you do not like capital letters in the network name I'm OK with changing > it to the lower one. > > > >Regarding your open question: "Creating new cluster would have to > >receive the new parameter (management network)" This new parameter > >should be kept optional, with a default value of ovirtmgmt. This way, a > >user that is unaware of the new feature, would see no change in > >functionality. > Using a specific network name seems isn't possible, as that network might be > not existent at the time of issuing the command. > Doing so could reduce the number cases where backward compatibility is > broken, but can not eliminate it totally. In those broken cases we might > return an error to a RESTful API user.
Excuse me, I did not understand break of backward compat. Does the current suggestion at http://www.ovirt.org/Features/Management_Network_As_A_Role#RESTful_API suffer from it? If so, it should be clearly marked and explained. _______________________________________________ Devel mailing list Devel@ovirt.org http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
