On 13:22 Mon 17 Jan , Iustin Pop wrote: > On Mon, Jan 17, 2011 at 02:19:22PM +0200, 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? > > Not sure if I have the right context, but: the instance will take anyway > a while to bootup, it's not like the moment we say "kvm …" the instance > is read to process packets, no?
Yes, it will anyway take a while, however the instance should normally be able to respond within a few seconds. Configuring the network before bringing the instance up means that it will "flap" if the instance fails to start (and this may happen in repeated start attempts due to a system bug). I cannot think of a case where this would matter, I just mention it for completeness. Also, see my other mail about the incoming migrations. Thanks, Apollon
