On Thu, Jul 25, 2013 at 1:43 PM, Sebastian Gebhard <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi there, > > [resend again, as it didn't arrive on the list] > > yesterday I gave the OpenvSwitch implementation for KVM some thoughts. > Especially the vlan stuff. I came across Dimitris NIC refactoring [1] which > introduces common functions for KVM and XEN networking using > tools/net-common.in for common functionality which is used by > tools/kvm-ifup.in and tools/vif-ganeti.in respectively. > > I think this approach is very good, because it keeps networking as > hypervisor indepentend as it can. Now my implementation of vlan uses > vif-openvswitch which comes with XEN 4.3 and is not compatible with > vif-ganeti right now. > > vif-openvswitch requires bridge=switch1.onevlan:anothervlan > whereas > vif-ganeti requires bridge=switch1 (which will crash when giving it > switch1.2:3:4 or something) > > I would suggest to merge the functionality of vif-openvswitch into > vif-ganeti. This way users stay independent of whether they wanna use > vif-ganeti or vif-openvswitch. >
+1. Not only, but also in net-common, so it can be used under kvm as well. > What are your thoughts about that? Do you see any issues I may have > overseen? > > Also, I would base my future implementations (QoS for example) on this > structure. > Indeed, it would be good if the implementation was independent of vif-openvswitch vs vif-ganeti, and of course compatible with all the ganeti hypervisors, and not dependent on Xen. Thanks, Guido
