----- Original Message ----- > From: "Itamar Heim" <ih...@redhat.com> > To: "Michael Pasternak" <mpast...@redhat.com> > Cc: engine-devel@ovirt.org > Sent: Sunday, March 18, 2012 10:39:48 AM > Subject: Re: [Engine-devel] Bridgeless Networks api design > > 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)
Consider using "purpose" instead of "designation". > _______________________________________________ > Engine-devel mailing list > Engine-devel@ovirt.org > http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/engine-devel > _______________________________________________ Engine-devel mailing list Engine-devel@ovirt.org http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/engine-devel
