[libvirt] [RFC] Network interface XML for containers

[Dan Smith]

DL> So the users init would be responsible for configuring the
DL> container veth device then?  At that point they can assign a
DL> static ip if desired?  This would mean that for a container that
DL> wanted to just run an application, <init> would have to point to a
DL> script that configured the network and then ran the application.
DL> Not sure that's a problem, just stating the consequence.

I think that specifying the IP in the XML is a nice shortcut, but I
wonder about two things:

First, if you're just starting a single application in a container,
what are the chances you want that single application to have an
interface and IP address of its own?

Second, the IP address that shows up in the libvirt config would imply
to viewers that they can access the guest in that way.  However, the
guest could certainly have changed the address of its interface, thus
invalidating the IP information that libvirt has.  This problem exists
with MAC addresses as well, although I think it's less severe because
people don't usually try to connect to a guest based on its MAC.

A grand total of 30 seconds of pondering on the above makes me lean in
the direction of not specifying the IP address in the XML.

-- 
Dan Smith
IBM Linux Technology Center
Open Hypervisor Team
email: danms at us.ibm.com
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 188 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://listman.redhat.com/archives/libvir-list/attachments/20080509/d2e1713f/attachment-0001.sig>