If we feel a need for specifying the relative position of gateway address and allocation pools when creating a subnet from a pool which will pick a CIDR from its prefixes, then the integer value solution is probably marginally better than the "fake IP" one (eg.: 0.0.0.1 to say the gateway is the first IP). Technically they're equivalent - and one could claim that the address-like notation is nothing bug and octet based representation of a number.
I wonder why a user would ask for a random CIDR with a given prefix, and then mandate that gateway IP and allocation pools are in precise locations within this randomly chosen CIDR. I guess there are good reasons I cannot figure out by myself. In my opinion all that counts here is that the semantics of a resource attribute should be the same in the request and the response. For instance, one should not have gateway_ip as a relative "counter-like" IP in the request body and then as an actual IP address in the response object. Salvatore On 21 March 2015 at 00:08, Tidwell, Ryan <ryan.tidw...@hp.com> wrote: > Great suggestion Kevin. Passing 0.0.0.1 as gateway_ip_template (or > whatever you call it) is essentially passing an address index, so when you > OR 0.0.0.1 with the CIDR you get your gateway set as the first usable IP in > the subnet. The intent of the user is to allocate the first usable IP > address in the subnet to the gateway. The wildcard notation for gateway IP > is really a more convoluted way of expressing this intent. Something like > address_index is a little more explicit in my mind. I think Kevin is on to > something. > > > > -Ryan > > > > *From:* Kevin Benton [mailto:blak...@gmail.com] > *Sent:* Friday, March 20, 2015 2:34 PM > *To:* OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) > *Subject:* Re: [openstack-dev] [api][neutron] Best API for generating > subnets from pool > > > > What if we just call it 'address_index' and make it an integer > representing the offset from the network start address? > > > > On Fri, Mar 20, 2015 at 12:39 PM, Carl Baldwin <c...@ecbaldwin.net> wrote: > > On Fri, Mar 20, 2015 at 1:34 PM, Jay Pipes <jaypi...@gmail.com> wrote: > > How is 0.0.0.1 a host address? That isn't a valid IP address, AFAIK. > > It isn't a valid *IP* address without the network part. However, it > can be referred to as the "host address on the network" or the host > part of the IP address. > > Carl > > > __________________________________________________________________________ > OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) > Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe > http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev > > > > > > -- > > Kevin Benton > > __________________________________________________________________________ > OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) > Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe > http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev > >
__________________________________________________________________________ OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev