[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/VCL-967?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
Andy Kurth updated VCL-967:
---------------------------
Description:
The {{libvirt.pm}} provisioning module currently requires that the VM profile
*VM Network 0* and *VM Network 1* settings be set to the name of physical
interfaces on the VM host (_eth0, br1, etc_).
Under libvirt-managed hypervisors such as KVM, you can define virtual networks
and give them names such as _private_ or _public_.
!virtual-networks.png|width=500!
Currently, reservations will fail if you were to specify _private_ in the VM
profile. This isn't intuitive and the behavior differs from how VMware VM
hosts are configured. The only way a VCL administrator could figure out the
problem would be to dig through and interpret vcld.log.
The {{libvirt.pm}} code should be extended to allow either a physical interface
(_br0_) or virtual network name (_private_) to be specified in the VM profile.
was:
The {{libvirt.pm}} provisioning module currently requires that the VM profile
*VM Network 0* and *VM Network 1* settings be set to the name of physical
interfaces on the VM host (_eth0, br1, etc_).
Under libvirt-managed hypervisors such as KVM, you can define virtual networks
and give them names such as _private_ or _public_. Currently, reservations
will fail if you were to specify _private_ in the VM profile. This isn't
intuitive and the behavior differs from how VMware VM hosts are configured.
The only way a VCL administrator could figure out the problem would be to dig
through and interpret vcld.log.
The {{libvirt.pm}} code should be extended to allow either a physical interface
(_br0_) or virtual network name (_private_) to be specified in the VM profile.
> Libvirt provisioning does not allow virtual network name to be specified in
> the VM host profile
> -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: VCL-967
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/VCL-967
> Project: VCL
> Issue Type: Improvement
> Components: vcld (backend)
> Reporter: Andy Kurth
> Assignee: Andy Kurth
> Fix For: 2.5
>
> Attachments: virtual-networks.png
>
>
> The {{libvirt.pm}} provisioning module currently requires that the VM profile
> *VM Network 0* and *VM Network 1* settings be set to the name of physical
> interfaces on the VM host (_eth0, br1, etc_).
> Under libvirt-managed hypervisors such as KVM, you can define virtual
> networks and give them names such as _private_ or _public_.
> !virtual-networks.png|width=500!
> Currently, reservations will fail if you were to specify _private_ in the VM
> profile. This isn't intuitive and the behavior differs from how VMware VM
> hosts are configured. The only way a VCL administrator could figure out the
> problem would be to dig through and interpret vcld.log.
> The {{libvirt.pm}} code should be extended to allow either a physical
> interface (_br0_) or virtual network name (_private_) to be specified in the
> VM profile.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.4#6332)
