----- Original Message ----- > From: "Alon Bar-Lev" <alo...@redhat.com> > To: "Livnat Peer" <lp...@redhat.com> > Cc: engine-devel@ovirt.org > Sent: Thursday, August 30, 2012 11:11:30 PM > Subject: Re: [Engine-devel] network subnet > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: "Livnat Peer" <lp...@redhat.com> > > To: "Alon Bar-Lev" <alo...@redhat.com> > > Cc: engine-devel@ovirt.org > > Sent: Thursday, August 30, 2012 10:16:05 PM > > Subject: Re: [Engine-devel] network subnet > > > > On 30/08/12 21:39, Alon Bar-Lev wrote: > > > > > > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > >> From: "Livnat Peer" <lp...@redhat.com> > > >> To: engine-devel@ovirt.org > > >> Sent: Thursday, August 30, 2012 3:22:29 PM > > >> Subject: [Engine-devel] network subnet > > >> > > >> Hi All, > > >> > > >> Today when a user wants to define a network subnet mask, he does > > >> it > > >> when > > >> he attaches the network to a host NIC. > > >> > > >> I was wondering if there is a reason not to define the network > > >> subnet > > >> on > > >> the logical network entity (Data center level). > > >> > > >> Thanks, Livnat > > > > > > Hello, > > > > > > I am sorry, maybe I do not understand... the IP scheme enforces > > > the > > > use of address mask in order to properly route packets. > > > > of course. My proposal is related to our user usage of the system. > > Today > > ovirt user, who wants to define a network subnet, has to type the > > subnet > > per host (per network), I think the user should only define it once > > on > > the logical network entity in the Data Center. > > Propagating the value to all hosts is needed but it should be our > > internal implementation detail.
I guess that would be solved by using host-network profiles/templates. The user will define it once, and apply each host with the relevant profile. Hope we will get to that sometime in the near future. It will surely save a lot of time and effort when trying to set up new environments. > > > > > > > > Network mask is used in any case, I guess it can be dropped from > > > configuration in favour of using the address class as mask, is > > > that what you suggest? > > > > > > > No, hope the above paragraph made it more clear. > > > > Hello, > > Then you assume that a logical network, which is actually layer 2 > network in our implementation, has layer 3 characteristics, right? > > In our current implementation "data center logical network" is pure > layer 2 segment aka layer 2 broadcast domain. > > One can use the same logical network for multiple layer 3 segments, > which is totally valid and consistent with standard physical layer 2 > setup. > > Unless I am missing something crucial, I would suggest to keep the > consistent physical->virtual mapping, unless we emulate layer 3 > switching. Layer 2 does not have layer 3 characteristics. > > Regards, > Alon. > > _______________________________________________ > 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