On Thu, Dec 11, 2014 at 01:51:45PM -0500, Laine Stump wrote:
> On 11/13/2014 04:33 AM, Cédric Bosdonnat wrote:
> > @@ -4667,6 +4671,58 @@ virDomainHostdevDefParseXMLSubsys(xmlNodePtr node,
> > return ret;
> > }
> >
> > +static virDomainNetIpDefPtr
> > +virDomainNetIpParseXML(xmlNodePtr node)
> > +{
> > + /* Parse the prefix in every case */
> > + virDomainNetIpDefPtr ip = NULL;
> > + char *prefixStr = NULL;
> > + unsigned int prefixValue = 0;
> > + char *familyStr = NULL;
> > + int family = AF_UNSPEC;
> > + char *address = NULL;
> > +
> > + if (!(prefixStr = virXMLPropString(node, "prefix")) ||
> > + (virStrToLong_ui(prefixStr, NULL, 10, &prefixValue) < 0)) {
> > + // Don't shout, just warn as some old config may not have a prefix
> > + VIR_WARN("Missing or invalid network prefix");
>
> This warning is unnecessary. IPv6 address default to a prefix of 64 if
> none is specified, and ipv4 addresses to 8, 16, or 24 depending on the
> range of address you're in (this is specified in an RFC somewhere,
> basically class A, B, and C networks), and it's quite common for the
> default prefix to be the correct one. See the function
> virSocketAddrGetIpPrefix() for details/example.
>
>
> > - <ip address='172.14.5.6'/>
> > + <ip address='172.14.5.6' family='ipv4'/>
>
> Do we really want to automatically add the "ipv4" in there if it's not
> there? That seems like unnecessary churn and verbosity in the config.
Given that we will now allow use of IPv6 I think we need to be explicit
about the address family.
Regards,
Daniel
--
|: http://berrange.com -o- http://www.flickr.com/photos/dberrange/ :|
|: http://libvirt.org -o- http://virt-manager.org :|
|: http://autobuild.org -o- http://search.cpan.org/~danberr/ :|
|: http://entangle-photo.org -o- http://live.gnome.org/gtk-vnc :|
--
libvir-list mailing list
libvir-list@xxxxxxxxxx
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/libvir-list