> 2. "Storage Network": if you intend to keep this role in the feature (I > don't think it adds a lot of functionality, see article 1b), it might be > better to call it "Gluster Network" - otherwise people using virt mode > might think this network is gonna be used to communicate with other > types of storage domains.
+1 on "Storage Network" -> "Gluster Network" (assuming this role is kept, as Lior mentioned). > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Lior Vernia" <lver...@redhat.com> > Sent: Monday, January 12, 2015 7:51:05 AM > > Hi Sahina! :) > > Cool feature, and I think long-awaited by many users. I have a few comments: > > 1. In the "Add Bricks" dialog, it seems like the "IP Address" field is a > list box - I presume the items contained there are all IP addresses > configured on the host's interfaces. > > 1. a. May I suggest that this contain network names instead of IP > addresses? Would be easier for users to think about things (they surely > remember the meaning of network names, not necessarily of IP addresses). > > 1. b. If I correctly understood the mock-up, then configuring a "Storage > Network" role only affects the default entry chosen in the list box. Is > it really worth the trouble of implementing this added role? It's quite > different than display/migration roles, which are used to determine what > IP address to use at a later time (i.e. not when configuring the host), > when a VM is run/migrated in the cluster. > > 1. c. A word of warning: sometimes a host interface's IP address is > missing in the engine - this usually happens when they're configured for > the first time with DHCP, and the setup networks command returns before > an IP address is allocated (this can later be resolved by refreshing > host capabilities, there's a button for that). So when displaying items > in the list box, you should really check that an IP address exists for > each network. > > 2. "Storage Network": if you intend to keep this role in the feature (I > don't think it adds a lot of functionality, see article 1b), it might be > better to call it "Gluster Network" - otherwise people using virt mode > might think this network is gonna be used to communicate with other > types of storage domains. > > Yours, Lior. > > On 12/01/15 14:00, Sahina Bose wrote: > > Hi all, > > > > Please review the feature page for this proposed solution and provide > > your inputs - http://www.ovirt.org/Features/Select_Network_For_Gluster > > > > thanks > > sahina > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Users mailing list > > Users@ovirt.org > > http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/users > _______________________________________________ > Users mailing list > Users@ovirt.org > http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/users > _______________________________________________ Users mailing list Users@ovirt.org http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/users
