"Daniel P. Berrange" <[email protected]> wrote on 05/12/2010 12:32:42 PM:
> > Ok, I think the XML suggestion is pretty reasonable wrt what I > can read about current state of the 802.* standards. My main > question is how this applies to the Cisco VNLink capability > that (IIUC) already exists in hardware today. > > It sounds like at an XML level it is pretty much wanting the > same data as the 802.1Qbh case, so we could simply add a > 3rd option that follows the scheme: > > <interface type='direct'> > <source dev='static' mode='vepa'/> > <model type='virtio'/> > <vsi type='vnlink'> > <parameters profileid='my_profile'/> > </vsi> > </interface> > > Internally this type='vnlink' would be something we key off > to decide whether we need to also pass down a host UUID and > other bits of info the Cisco stuff wants (guest UUID/name). If someone wants to provide patches for triggering the setup for this 3rd technology then this should now be fairly easy to support. Stefan
-- libvir-list mailing list [email protected] https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/libvir-list
