Created attachment 861722 [details] screenshot 1 Description of problem: In 3.4 vdsm provides information about UP/DOWN states of bridge/bond/VLAN , this information is not shown to the user. This information could be indicated by changing icon color (red/green). See screenshot. Additional info: Information provided by vdsm network = {';vdsmdummy;': {'name': ';vdsmdummy;', 'rxDropped': '0', 'rxErrors': '0', 'rxRate': '0.0', 'speed': '1000', 'state': 'down', 'txDropped': '0', 'txErrors': '0', 'txRate': '0.0'}, 'NET_VMs': {'name': 'NET_VMs', 'rxDropped': '0', 'rxErrors': '0', 'rxRate': '0.0', 'speed': '1000', 'state': 'up', 'txDropped': '0', 'txErrors': '0', 'txRate': '0.0'}, 'VLAN_1': {'name': 'VLAN_1', 'rxDropped': '0', 'rxErrors': '0', 'rxRate': '0.0', 'speed': '1000', 'state': 'up', 'txDropped': '0', 'txErrors': '0', 'txRate': '0.0'}, 'VLAN_2': {'name': 'VLAN_2', 'rxDropped': '0', 'rxErrors': '0', 'rxRate': '0.0', 'speed': '1000', 'state': 'up', 'txDropped': '0', 'txErrors': '0', 'txRate': '0.0'}, 'VLAN_3': {'name': 'VLAN_3', 'rxDropped': '0', 'rxErrors': '0', 'rxRate': '0.0', 'speed': '1000', 'state': 'up', 'txDropped': '0', 'txErrors': '0', 'txRate': '0.0'}, 'bond0': {'name': 'bond0', 'rxDropped': '0', 'rxErrors': '0', 'rxRate': '0.0', 'speed': '1000', 'state': 'down', 'txDropped': '0', 'txErrors': '0', 'txRate': '0.0'}, 'bond1': {'name': 'bond1', 'rxDropped': '0', 'rxErrors': '0', 'rxRate': '0.0', 'speed': '1000', 'state': 'up', 'txDropped': '0', 'txErrors': '0', 'txRate': '0.0'}, 'bond1.1': {'name': 'bond1.1', 'rxDropped': '0', 'rxErrors': '0', 'rxRate': '0.0', 'speed': '1000', 'state': 'up', 'txDropped': '0', 'txErrors': '0', 'txRate': '0.0'}, 'bond1.123': {'name': 'bond1.123', 'rxDropped': '0', 'rxErrors': '0', 'rxRate': '0.0', 'speed': '1000', 'state': 'up', 'txDropped': '0', 'txErrors': '0', 'txRate': '0.0'}, 'bond1.2': {'name': 'bond1.2', 'rxDropped': '0', 'rxErrors': '0', 'rxRate': '0.0', 'speed': '1000', 'state': 'up', 'txDropped': '0', 'txErrors': '0', 'txRate': '0.0'}, 'bond1.3': {'name': 'bond1.3', 'rxDropped': '0', 'rxErrors': '0', 'rxRate': '0.0', 'speed': '1000', 'state': 'up', 'txDropped': '0', 'txErrors': '0', 'txRate': '0.0'}, 'ovirtmgmt': {'name': 'ovirtmgmt', 'rxDropped': '0', 'rxErrors': '0', 'rxRate': '0.2', 'speed': '1000', 'state': 'up', 'txDropped': '0', 'txErrors': '0', 'txRate': '0.0'}, 'p1p1': {'name': 'p1p1', 'rxDropped': '0', 'rxErrors': '0', 'rxRate': '0.0', 'speed': '1000', 'state': 'up', 'txDropped': '0', 'txErrors': '0', 'txRate': '0.0'}, 'p1p2': {'name': 'p1p2', 'rxDropped': '0', 'rxErrors': '0', 'rxRate': '0.0', 'speed': '1000', 'state': 'up', 'txDropped': '0', 'txErrors': '0', 'txRate': '0.0'}}
Bond status is now included in the subtab, but I am not convinced bridge and VLAN status should be added - the fact that networks are represented by bridges on hosts is an implementation detail that we usually try to abstract away from the oVirt user (VLAN devices are similar, and in fact we had made an error when we hadn't abstracted that implementation detail in our API, for example). Nir, what do you think? Adding an up-to-date screenshot.
Created attachment 918655 [details] Up-to-date interface view
(In reply to Lior Vernia from comment #1) > Bond status is now included in the subtab, but I am not convinced bridge and > VLAN status should be added - the fact that networks are represented by > bridges on hosts is an implementation detail that we usually try to abstract > away from the oVirt user (VLAN devices are similar, and in fact we had made > an error when we hadn't abstracted that implementation detail in our API, > for example). > > Nir, what do you think? > > Adding an up-to-date screenshot. Martin, what exact information would you expect here? IMHO, the critical information we need to include is the physical devices (i.e., interface/bond) status as we do today, and the *accurate* B/W utilization as requested on BZ 1063343.
My original thought was ability to see quickly if someone shuts VLAN/bridge down on host by mistake. But if we stick with the fact that in present state network should be manipulated only over GUI (or API) it should not be needed. All in all I think we can go with: physical devices (i.e., interface/bond) status as we do today, and the *accurate* B/W utilization as requested on BZ 1063343. closing as current release (bond state was added already)
Not quite a duplicate, but last piece (bond status) was solved as part of that bug. *** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 1079719 ***