On 14:19 Mon 17 Jan , Apollon Oikonomopoulos wrote: > On 12:15 Mon 17 Jan , Guido Trotter wrote: > > On Mon, Jan 17, 2011 at 12:00 PM, Apollon Oikonomopoulos > > > I was thinking of that as well. Thing is, at the point this happens, > > > the > > > KVM instance has already started and should be cleaned up. What do you > > > think? > > > > > > > Has it? Wouldn't it be better to first set up the network and then > > start the instance? Since we open the tap before... > > Yes, it is probably the best solution offering fine-grained behaviour. > However, this means that the instance will be externally visible (e.g. > in routed mode w/ proxy-ARP), before it has actually started. Should I > go on with this? > > Apollon
One side-note: One of the goals of performing KVM configuration in ganeti, was to better support migration of routed instances. That's why we defer network configuration of migrated instances until the migration is over. What should happen in that case? Keeping in mind that currently (i.e. with kvm's script) no error handling is done for the network configuration, I'd say we should follow a best-effort approach and fail on newly-started instances if network configuration fails, and just print a warning for migrated instances. Do you agree? Apollon
