On Tue, Jan 16, 2007 at 05:16:54PM -0500, Aron Griffis wrote:
> Daniel P. Berrange wrote: [Tue Jan 16 2007, 04:54:49PM EST]
> > > > 3. The way I think you re suggesting - a libvirt server on every remote
> > > >host which calls into the regular libvirt internal driver model to
> > > >proxy
On Mon, Jan 15, 2007 at 08:06:18PM +, Mark McLoughlin wrote:
> Hi,
> Dan and I have been discussing how to "fix networking", not just Xen's
> networking but also getting something sane wrt. QEMU/KVM etc.
>
> Comments very welcome on the writeup below. The libvirt stuff is
> towards
Daniel P. Berrange wrote: [Tue Jan 16 2007, 04:54:49PM EST]
> On Tue, Jan 16, 2007 at 04:19:37PM -0500, Aron Griffis wrote:
> > Daniel P. Berrange wrote: [Tue Jan 16 2007, 10:57:03AM EST]
> > > 2. The way I was always anticipating remote use of libvirt to work. The
> > >app uses libvirt local
On Tue, Jan 16, 2007 at 04:19:37PM -0500, Aron Griffis wrote:
> Daniel P. Berrange wrote: [Tue Jan 16 2007, 10:57:03AM EST]
> > 2. The way I was always anticipating remote use of libvirt to work. The
> >app uses libvirt locally which opens a connection to the remote machine
> >using whatev
Daniel P. Berrange wrote: [Tue Jan 16 2007, 10:57:03AM EST]
> 2. The way I was always anticipating remote use of libvirt to work. The
>app uses libvirt locally which opens a connection to the remote machine
>using whatever remote management protocol is relevant for the hypervisor
>in q
On Tue, Jan 16, 2007 at 07:09:30PM +, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 16, 2007 at 05:21:15PM +, Mark McLoughlin wrote:
> > - Or perhaps, libvirt would *always* talk to a daemon ... whether
> > local or remote. That way you don't have the race condition where
> > multiple
On Tue, Jan 16, 2007 at 05:21:15PM +, Mark McLoughlin wrote:
> On Tue, 2007-01-16 at 15:57 +, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
> > On Mon, Jan 15, 2007 at 08:53:43PM +, Mark McLoughlin wrote:
> > > On Mon, 2007-01-15 at 20:06 +, Mark McLoughlin wrote:
> > >
> > > > * Since virConnec
Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
On Tue, Jan 16, 2007 at 04:26:38PM +, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
http://people.redhat.com/berrange/libvirt/libvirt-arch-remote-2.png
Thought provoking.
It makes me wonder - should there be (or is there) a generic way to
remote C shar
Hi Dan,
So, what you describe is similar to what I was suggesting, but the
difference from what I was suggesting means that it does nothing for the
actual problem :-)
On Tue, 2007-01-16 at 15:57 +, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 15, 2007 at 08:53:43PM +, Mark McLoughlin wr
Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
On Tue, Jan 16, 2007 at 04:26:38PM +, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
http://people.redhat.com/berrange/libvirt/libvirt-arch-remote-2.png
Thought provoking.
It makes me wonder - should there be (or is there) a generic way to
remote C shar
On Tue, Jan 16, 2007 at 04:26:38PM +, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
> Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
> > http://people.redhat.com/berrange/libvirt/libvirt-arch-remote-2.png
>
> Thought provoking.
>
> It makes me wonder - should there be (or is there) a generic way to
> remote C shared library calls
On Tue, Jan 16, 2007 at 04:42:21PM +, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
> Hugh Brock wrote:
> >Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
> >
> >>3. The way I think you re suggesting - a libvirt server on every remote
> >> host which calls into the regular libvirt internal driver model to
> >> proxy remote calls. S
Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
Hugh Brock wrote:
Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
3. The way I think you re suggesting - a libvirt server on every remote
host which calls into the regular libvirt internal driver model to
proxy remote calls. So even if the hypervisor in question provides a
remote n
Hugh Brock wrote:
Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
3. The way I think you re suggesting - a libvirt server on every remote
host which calls into the regular libvirt internal driver model to
proxy remote calls. So even if the hypervisor in question provides a
remote network management API, we
On Tue, Jan 16, 2007 at 04:26:38PM +, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
> Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
> > http://people.redhat.com/berrange/libvirt/libvirt-arch-remote-2.png
>
> Thought provoking.
>
> It makes me wonder - should there be (or is there) a generic way to
> remote C shared library calls
Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
http://people.redhat.com/berrange/libvirt/libvirt-arch-remote-2.png
Thought provoking.
It makes me wonder - should there be (or is there) a generic way to
remote C shared library calls? This sort of thing exists in other
languages (eg. Java RMI).
Rich.
--
Red
Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
On Mon, Jan 15, 2007 at 08:53:43PM +, Mark McLoughlin wrote:
Hi,
One thing which is relevant to Dan's authentication stuff ...
On Mon, 2007-01-15 at 20:06 +, Mark McLoughlin wrote:
* Since virConnect is supposed to be a connection to a specific
On Mon, Jan 15, 2007 at 08:53:43PM +, Mark McLoughlin wrote:
> Hi,
> One thing which is relevant to Dan's authentication stuff ...
>
> On Mon, 2007-01-15 at 20:06 +, Mark McLoughlin wrote:
>
> > * Since virConnect is supposed to be a connection to a specific
> > hyperv
Hey,
Just one note - dovecot is an example of a server which creates a
self-signed server cert in the %post scriptlet of its package.
It at least allows people to run the server without doing anything.
Anyone who wants a CA signed server cert can install one later.
Cheers,
Mark.
Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
At the corporate end I'd expect them to have formal CA & certificate
issuing
procedures. Most community folks will likely end up just creating a
private
self-signed CA cert - if we document it, its a fairly trivial command or
two to run usin
Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
At the corporate end I'd expect them to have formal CA & certificate issuing
procedures. Most community folks will likely end up just creating a private
self-signed CA cert - if we document it, its a fairly trivial command or
two to run using openssl, or certtool.
Open
21 matches
Mail list logo
