Bug 821172

Summary: VM network name should be limited to 15 chars (because of Linux bridge limits)
Product: Red Hat Enterprise Virtualization Manager Reporter: lpeer <lpeer>
Component: ovirt-engineAssignee: lpeer <lpeer>
Status: CLOSED DEFERRED QA Contact: Martin Pavlik <mpavlik>
Severity: medium Docs Contact:
Priority: low    
Version: 3.1.0CC: dyasny, gklein, iheim, lpeer, Rhev-m-bugs, yeylon, ykaul
Target Milestone: ---   
Target Release: ---   
Hardware: Unspecified   
OS: Unspecified   
Whiteboard: network
Fixed In Version: Doc Type: Bug Fix
Doc Text:
Story Points: ---
Clone Of:
: 827870 (view as bug list) Environment:
Last Closed: 2012-08-30 10:40:43 UTC Type: Bug
Regression: --- Mount Type: ---
Documentation: --- CRM:
Verified Versions: Category: ---
oVirt Team: Network RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host:
Cloudforms Team: --- Target Upstream Version:
Embargoed:
Bug Depends On:    
Bug Blocks: 827870    

Description lpeer 2012-05-12 18:46:05 UTC 
Description of problem:

The name of a VM network is limited to 20 chars today but should be limited to 15 characters.
The current implementation creates Linux bridge (which is limited to 15 chars) using the name of the network.
I would add validation for the input but not change the DB scheme,mostly because not all networks require bridge.


Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable):


How reproducible:


Steps to Reproduce:
1.
2.
3.
  
Actual results:


Expected results:


Additional info:
Comment 1 Yaniv Kaul 2012-05-13 05:02:41 UTC 
I think the limitation should be that the first 15 chars string should be unique, not limited so much in length. (see example in Bugzilla, with its annoying 20 chars limitation for a bug alias).

Example:
vlan161_office-and-it-network
vlan162_qa-and-rnd-network

would be ok with my suggestion, truncated in yours (or disallowed).
Comment 4 lpeer 2012-08-30 10:39:52 UTC 
We are not sure if the right solution for this bug is to make the 15 first characters unique or differentiate between the Linux bridge name (which is the reason for this limitation) and the network name.
Comment 5 lpeer 2012-08-30 10:40:43 UTC 
This bug won't make it to 3.1, and since the required behaviour is not clear, closing it for now.