[Ovirt-devel] Network configuration wiki page created...

[Darryl Pierce]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
> It feels like there's a bit of disconnect here between the concept
> your trying to present & the way you're making users configure it.
> 
> eg, you're talking in terms of defining networks for virtual machines,
> but making the user work in terms of individual interfaces. I particularly
> don't like the duplicated forms for IP / DHCP config, and the way you
> end up picking interfaces to go with your bonding device, or the fact 
> that you're asking user's to name it.
> 
> An approach that maps more closely to the conceptual model would be
> to have a single form, with three parts.
> 
>  - First define the IP address configuration.
>  - Select one or more physical devices to associate
>    with the network.
>  - Optionally specify bonding mode
>  - Optionally specify a VLAN number
> 
> If they pick only one physical device, then simply put that straight
> into a bridge. 
> 
> If they pick two or more physical devices, then ask whether they want
> 'bandwidth aggregation' or 'failover' mode and automatically put the 
> devices into a bond device. No need to tell them your creating bond 
> devices - that's not what they care about - only care about whether 
> the network being define is aggregating bandwidth or providing 
> failover. Use of bonding is a mere implementation detail. Automatically
> create the name for the bond device starting with bond0, and incrementing,
> then put this bond in the bridge.
> 
> If they enter a VLAN, then instead of putting the bond device / physical
> device in the bridge, then configure a VLAN device ontop of them, and
> put the VLAN device in the bridge. Again you're not asking them for
> naming of the VLAN device - just whether there's a VLAN number they
> want to use
> 
> Note that whatever they choose for physical device, bonding, vlan
> configure has no impact on the IP address configuration part - IP
> details are logically associated with the network as a whole, only
> being assigned to physical device behind the scenes. Or to put it 
> anther way - there's no need to ask the user whether they want to
> put the IP address on the bond device vs the physical device - that
> choice is implicitly driven from the configuration they choose for
> devices.

Thank you for the feedback. I've redone the mockup using the input
you've provided. Can you take a look and tell me if this is closer to
what you're thinking?

- --
Darryl L. Pierce <dpierce at redhat.com> : GPG KEYID: 6C4E7F1B
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Fedora - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iEYEARECAAYFAkj3ZRUACgkQjaT4DmxOfxtKKQCg8ZDWPc9nfekxzhBMVv87aE0D
msgAniIcli+p5olGkh0J7Nzkkq91oFIU
=3NT0
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: dpierce.vcf
Type: text/x-vcard
Size: 319 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://listman.redhat.com/archives/ovirt-devel/attachments/20081016/77161900/attachment.vcf>