<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html;
charset=ISO-8859-1">
</head>
<body text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF">
Hi, guys,<br>
<br>
Currently we have one core and two extensions that related network
in Nova API v3.<br>
They are ips, attach_interface and multinic. I have two questions
for them.<br>
<br>
The first question is about ips and attach_interface. The below was
the index's response<br>
of ips and attach_interface:<br>
ips:<br>
{<br>
"addresses": {<br>
"net1": [<br>
{<br>
"addr": "10.0.0.8",<br>
"mac_addr": "fa:16:3e:c2:0f:aa",<br>
"type": "fixed",<br>
"version": 4<br>
},<br>
{<br>
"addr": "30.0.0.5",<br>
"mac_addr": "fa:16:3e:c2:0f:aa",<br>
"type": "floating",<br>
"version": 4<br>
}<br>
]<br>
}<br>
}<br>
<br>
attach_interface:<br>
{<br>
"interface_attachments": [<br>
{<br>
"fixed_ips": [<br>
{<br>
"ip_address": "10.0.0.8",<br>
"subnet_id":
"f84f7d51-758c-4a02-a4c9-171ed988a884"<br>
}<br>
],<br>
"mac_addr": "fa:16:3e:c2:0f:aa",<br>
"net_id": "b6ba34f1-5504-4aca-825b-04511c104802",<br>
"port_id": "3660380b-0075-4115-be96-f08b41ccdf5d",<br>
"port_state": "ACTIVE"<br>
}<br>
]<br>
}<br>
<br>
The problem is the responses are similar, but just with different
view, and all the information can<br>
get from Neutron directly. I think we didn't want to proxy Neutron
through Nova. So how about<br>
we merge ips and attach_interface into an new extension. The new
extension will be include the<br>
things as below:<br>
1. Extend the detail of servers to list the uuid of port. User can
get more information from Neutron<br>
by port uuid.<br>
2. Attach and detach interface that move from extension
attach_interface.<br>
3. Extend the creation of servers to support network (The patch
already here
<meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html;
charset=ISO-8859-1">
<a href="https://review.openstack.org/#/c/36615/">https://review.openstack.org/#/c/36615/</a>)<br>
<br>
The second question is about multinic. Looking into the code,
multinic just add fixed_ip for server's port.<br>
That can be done by Neutron API directly too. But there are
inject_network_info and reset_network<br>
in the code. Only xen and vmware's driver implement that function.
I'm not familiar with xen and<br>
vmware, I guess it use guest agent to update the guest network. If I
am right, I think we didn't<br>
encourage using that way to update guest network.There are api for
inject_network_info and reset_network<br>
in extension admin-actions also. I think we can keep them. But can
we delete multinic for V3?<br>
<br>
Thanks<br>
Alex<br>
<br>
</body>
</html>