"Daniel P. Berrange" <berrange@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote on 05/12/2010 12:32:42 PM:
>
> Ok, I think the XML suggestion is pretty reasonable wrt what I
> can read about current state of the 802.* standards. My main
> question is how this applies to the Cisco VNLink capability
> that (IIUC) already exists in hardware today.
>
> It sounds like at an XML level it is pretty much wanting the
> same data as the 802.1Qbh case, so we could simply add a
> 3rd option that follows the scheme:
>
> <interface type='direct'>
> <source dev='static' mode='vepa'/>
> <model type='virtio'/>
> <vsi type='vnlink'>
> <parameters profileid='my_profile'/>
> </vsi>
> </interface>
>
> Internally this type='vnlink' would be something we key off
> to decide whether we need to also pass down a host UUID and
> other bits of info the Cisco stuff wants (guest UUID/name).
If someone wants to provide patches for triggering the setup for
this 3rd technology then this should now be fairly easy to support.
Stefan
-- libvir-list mailing list libvir-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/libvir-list