[lxc-devel] [PATCH 2/3] c/r: get rid of dump_net_info()

[Serge Hallyn]

Quoting Tycho Andersen (tycho.andersen at canonical.com):
> On Wed, Aug 12, 2015 at 03:09:22PM +0000, Serge Hallyn wrote:
> > Quoting Tycho Andersen (tycho.andersen at canonical.com):
> > > On Wed, Aug 12, 2015 at 02:54:14PM +0000, Serge Hallyn wrote:
> > > > Quoting Tycho Andersen (tycho.andersen at canonical.com):
> > > > > This was originally used to propagate the bridge and veth names across
> > > > > hosts, but now we extract both from the container's config file, and
> > > > 
> > > > Is that the right thing to do?
> > > 
> > > I don't know, actually. I did it so that you could switch bridges
> > > across hosts (and because the code is considerably simpler); it does
> > > keep the MAC and all that the same, so in theory it should Just Work.
> > > Someone who knows more about networks can probably correct me if I'm
> > > wrong, though :)
> > 
> > I do prefer simple, in general.
> > 
> > My concern with this is that any change to the running container which
> > was not reflected in the config will not be retained.  I wonder if it
> > is better to fix dump_net_info() to give the information you actually
> > want.
> 
> Yeah, it is true that if you change the container-side veth's name
> it'll screw things up, so that's probably good to save. I think it is

Or if you use lxc-device to add a new nic, or the container simply creates
a new veth pair internally for use by its application.

> useful to be able to change the host bridge the container is attached
> to, and in principle it shouldn't screw anything up. So I'm not quite
> sure how to deal with that case.
> 
> (Note that none of this matters in LXD land, since LXD is managing all
> the configuration for you and you can't change it. It is an issue with
> lxc-checkpoint and the config file lxc, though.)

Well if we simply don't know what the right thing is, then doing the
simplest thing for now is reasonable.