On Fri, Nov 09, 2012 at 12:59:21AM +0200, Dan Kenigsberg wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 08, 2012 at 10:35:23PM +0100, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
> > On Thu, Nov 08, 2012 at 11:25:19PM +0200, Dan Kenigsberg wrote:
> > > On Thu, Nov 08, 2012 at 06:58:09PM +0800, huntxu wrote:
> > > > Hi, folks.
> > > > 
> > > > Recently I am considering to implement ipv6 support for vdsm. First
> > > > of all I
> > > > would like to know whether there is already someone working on this
> > > > feature.
> > > 
> > > I am not aware of anyone working on ipv6 at the momemnt. You are more
> > > than welcome to lead the way!
> > > 
> > > > If so, I might do something to help, however, if not, I would try to
> > > > implement
> > > > it with suggestions from this discussion.
> > > > 
> > > > With ipv6 support vdsm is supposed to work properly in:
> > > >     * mixed environment, in which ipv4 and ipv6 addresses coexist
> > > >     * ipv6-pure environment
> > > > 
> > > > My idea is:
> > > > 
> > > > 1) Provide a mechanism to setup ipv6 address configuration of a host via
> > > > XMLRPC/RestAPI. This would be done in the current ConfigNetwork module 
> > > > by
> > > > modifying the network-scripts/ifcfg-* of the devices. Thus the host is
> > > > able to access ipv6 network (with correct configuration).
> > > 
> > > Host network configuration is an important part. We would have to report
> > > ipv6 addresses, too.
> > > 
> > > Please keep in mind, that we would like to move away from direct ifcfg
> > > mangaling since it's distribution-dependent, and not even the common
> > > practice in modern Fedoras. (sob)
> > 
> > I'd love to see VDSM start to make use of libvirt's network interface
> > APIs, since we added all that support for making transaction config
> > changes for the benefit of VDSM :-)  It of course supports IPv6
> > configuration already, and would get you portability to Debian, Suse
> > and soon BSD via NetCF.
> 
> Yeah, we are shamefully behind schedule here.. I hope Mark Wu is going
> to step up our pace (http://gerrit.ovirt.org/8618).
> 
> Dan, this may be a good opportunity to raise my concerns about netcf's
> ifcfg-based implementation. How is NetCF going to interoperate with the
> rise to fame of NetworkManager an systemd? If I recall correctly,
> /etc/init.d/network, which is responsible of ifup'ing ifcfgs, is not
> even started by default on F17+. Due you have plans for a bleak future
> where ifcfg's are frowned upon?

NetworkManager is able to read / write ifcfg files in
/etc/sysconfig/network-scripts. Historically it would
ignore any config that referred to bridging, since it
did not support that. As and when NM supports things
like bridging/bonding/vlans hopefully it will also get
the ability to understand those ifcfg files.

Eventually we may well create a virInterface API driver
in libvirt that talks to NetworkManager via DBus, replacing
the use of netcf. This should be transparent to apps like
VDSM that used virInterface. This is actually why you want
to use libvirt's virInterface APIs instead of directly using
netcf.

Regards,
Daniel
-- 
|: http://berrange.com      -o-    http://www.flickr.com/photos/dberrange/ :|
|: http://libvirt.org              -o-             http://virt-manager.org :|
|: http://autobuild.org       -o-         http://search.cpan.org/~danberr/ :|
|: http://entangle-photo.org       -o-       http://live.gnome.org/gtk-vnc :|
_______________________________________________
vdsm-devel mailing list
vdsm-devel@lists.fedorahosted.org
https://lists.fedorahosted.org/mailman/listinfo/vdsm-devel

Reply via email to