On Fri, 2007-03-09 at 03:03 +0000, Daniel P. Berrange wrote: > Anyway, we now have two different syntaxes in the XML for defining what > is more or less the same thing which is a real PITA for the tools. It > is useful to have the distinct representations - one is for 'managed' > bridges, and the other is for 'unmanaged' bridges - we can do some much > more interesting things with managed bridges. As I said in another mail, the way I'd imagined virt-install working would be that by default it would connect guest NICs to the default network (i.e. not the bridge associated with the default network), but you could still use --bridge to explicitly connect the guest to a bridge. And we'd have a --network option. > To improve life for the tools though I'd like to do two things as a high > priority > > - Support managed networks in Xen - we can simply lookup the bridge > device associated with a network and tell Xen to use vif-bridge with > this device. We already have this in libvirt. See virDomainParseXMLIfDesc() > For the reverse Xen will tell us what bridge device a > guest is using, and we can reverse lookup the corresponding network I'm not sure why you want this? > > - Support non-managed networks in QEMU - we can simply enslave the > QEMU tap device to an arbitrary user specific bridge device. Yes, we should definitely have this. Cheers, Mark.