On Fri, Feb 10, 2017 at 11:39 AM, Mark Shuttleworth <[email protected]> wrote:
> > Well, hold on. If you are suggesting that we use URL's like /foo/vlan/5020 > and expect people to know that the 5020 is not actually a weird vlan, then > I disagree. If you're suggesting something else, I couldn't follow, sorry > for being dense :) No, I actually agree; we can certainly still improve on this. Maybe by transforming it to base64 or similar, so it's clear that it's just an opaque identifier. I wasn't defending the current implementation, just trying to explain the current situation and some of the subtleties of it. (If I remember correctly, it was a bug fix late in MAAS 1.9. Originally the VID namespace overlapped completely with these identifiers, which could have been complete chaos and confusion.) Hmmmm.... this is basically right, I just wouldn't call it a shared-subnet > (don't know what that is). Generally, I find that auto-creating something just to maintain a 1:1 > relationship with something else is a bad idea. It leads to making up names > for things. As in this example. Yes; well, that's what the ISC DHCP server calls it, so MAAS doesn't really have a say in the debate. (Correction: the configuration item is "shared-network"; I didn't recall correctly.) There was no forcing function for the auto-creation; it just so happened that this ISC DHCP concept lined up nicely with VLANs in MAAS. Both models describe a Layer 2 network and its associated DHCP-enabled interfaces, subnets, and ranges. Regards, Mike
-- Maas-devel mailing list [email protected] Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/maas-devel
