On 03/18/2012 10:39 AM, Itamar Heim wrote: > On 03/18/2012 10:43 AM, Michael Pasternak wrote: >> On 03/18/2012 10:21 AM, Itamar Heim wrote: >>> On 03/18/2012 09:33 AM, Michael Pasternak wrote: >>>> the question is Management/Migration/Storage/Display can be non-bridged?, >>>> if so, >>>> <bridged>true|false</bridged> makes sense. >>> >>> bridge is an implementation detail at host level, hence the discussion is >>> about abstracting it from users. >>> a VM network doesn't have to have bridge at host level, for networks using >>> VMFex or SR-IOV >> >> <network> >> <designation>Management|Migration|Storage|Display|VM</designation> >> </network> >> >> what do you say about having it as another /designation/ type? >> > > it==VM? > the above looks ok to me. > (I really hope for a better element name than designation though)
I'd avoid using /type/ as type usually applies on single variant, /assignment/ maybe? nothing batter comes to my mind -- Michael Pasternak RedHat, ENG-Virtualization R&D _______________________________________________ Engine-devel mailing list [email protected] http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/engine-devel
