Re: [netcf-devel] Undefining a bridge does not recreate the original interface

On Wed, Oct 28, 2009 at 02:54:19PM -0400, Laine Stump wrote: > On 10/28/2009 02:30 PM, Daniel P. Berrange wrote: > >> On Wed, Oct 28, 2009 at 01:51:28PM -0400, Cole Robinson wrote: >> >> >>> Hi all, >>> >>> Playing with netcf a bit, I'm hitting an issue with undefining a bridge: >>> the original interface disappears from the ncftool --list output, and >>> its ifcfg script is completely gone. >>> >>> $ sudo cat /etc/sysconfig/network-scripts/ifcfg-wlan0 >>> # Networking Interface >>> DEVICE=wlan0 >>> HWADDR=00:1C:BF:04:29:A4 >>> ONBOOT=no >>> TYPE=wireless >>> >>> $ cat netcfbridge.xml >>> <interface type="bridge" name="testbr0"> >>> <start mode="none"/> >>> <mtu size="1500"/> >>> <protocol family="ipv4"> >>> <dhcp/> >>> </protocol> >>> <bridge stp="off" delay="0.01"> >>> <interface type="ethernet" name="wlan0"> >>> <mac address="00:1C:BF:04:29:A4"/> >>> </interface> >>> </bridge> >>> </interface> >>> >>> $ sudo src/ncftool >>> ncftool> list --all >>> eth0 >>> lo >>> wlan0 >>> >>> ncftool> define netcfbridge.xml >>> Defined interface testbr0 >>> >>> >> I'd argue that this should have in fact failed, because the >> consituent interface in the bridge definition was already a >> defined primary interface. >> >> > > Yes, I agree with this. That way nobody would be able to accidentally > define over the top of a config without at least acknowledging they were > losing the original information. > > > >> I think netcf should have required the caller to explictly >> undefine wlan0 here first, rather than secretly undefining >> it as a side-effect of defining testbr0. >> >> This would then obviously mean that when later undefining >> testbr0, there would be no question of re-defining wlan0 >> >> Yes, doing it this way would bring us back to the principle of least surprise. Laine, would this be difficult?