On Fri, Apr 21, 2006 at 10:33:29PM +0100, Daniel P. Berrange wrote: [...] > What would you anticipate the scope of the domains defined with these > APIs to be. Would they be visible to only to the app defining them (ie > just kept in process memory), shared between any locally running app > using libvirt on the host, or shared between arbitrary apps connecting > to the HV, even if connecting remotely ? initially the first at least for the implementation test period, then probably the second because resiliency to restart and common view will be needed. The third one I don't think I can technically implement it without forcing xend to switch to a common format, and there is no way I can suggest this will be reachable. [...] > There is nothing fundamentally wrong - *if* you are only aiming to support > the needs of a simple local management tool. In the broader case though it > does not look to be effective because it: [...] > So I think my core question is - what are the client application uses cases > & scenarios which these APIs are intended to serve. CIM providers primarily and similar local management tools or agents. Daniel -- Daniel Veillard | Red Hat http://redhat.com/ veillard@xxxxxxxxxx | libxml GNOME XML XSLT toolkit http://xmlsoft.org/ http://veillard.com/ | Rpmfind RPM search engine http://rpmfind.net/