xe-reset-networking: Allow the user to perform a network reset without renaming the management interface#6852
Conversation
sgerag
force-pushed
the
dev/stefanos/network-mgmt-iface
branch
from
c9dfa97 to
693cee0
Compare
sgerag
force-pushed
the
dev/stefanos/network-mgmt-iface
branch
from
fee2270 to
4d92f24
Compare
python3/bin/xe-reset-networking
Outdated
| if not options.reset_interface_name_rules: | ||
| configuration.append("Rename interface rules: Yes") | ||
| else: | ||
| configuration.append("Rename interface rules: No") |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
| configuration.append("Rename interface rules: No") | |
| if options.reset_interface_name_rules: | |
| configuration.append("Reset interface name rules: Yes") | |
| else: | |
| configuration.append("Reset interface name rules: No") |
I prefer Reset interface name rules against Rename interface rules. I don't quite understand the current one.
At last, please squash the commits into one.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Oops, I missed the logic in the confirmation message. I will fix it. Also, I will update your suggestion in the confirmation message. Although, it won't align correctly with the previous/next parameters printouts.
On a more fundamental note, I realized that by making --reset-interface-name-rules to default to True, essentially there is no way to let the user to avoid this behavior. So, either we will fall back to a parameter that defaults to False or we can have a parameter that has an additional argument passed to denote if the reset will take place or not.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
--reset-interface-name-rules default with True is same with your initial --keep-interface-name default with False. I don't think it's different with your initial version.
Sorry, I’m getting a little tired of this review... I think I have already clarified the case.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
--reset-interface-name-rulesdefault with True is same with your initial--keep-interface-namedefault with False. I don't think it's different with your initial version.
No, it is not the same. With --reset-interface-name-rules both the default behavior and when the user passes --reset-interface-name-rules, results in the reset operation. There is no way for the user to request NOT to reset (e.g. --reset-interface-name-rules=false does not work). With --keep-interface-name this is not the case.
Sorry, I’m getting a little tired of this review... I think I have already clarified the case.
No worries, just let me know how (or if) you want to proceed.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
OK, my bad. const=True will ignore =false. Go ahead use keep-interface-name-rules or sth that supports accepting false value. I'm fine.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Done, pushed 2nd time to update the variable name as well.
sgerag
force-pushed
the
dev/stefanos/network-mgmt-iface
branch
from
4d92f24 to
d7d54e6
Compare
renaming the interface There are some use cases according to which the user would like to perform a network reset by keeping the interface's name intact (prevent reseting the interface name rules). This commit allows the user to run the xe-reset-networking script by requesting the aforementioned behavior. Signed-off-by: Stefanos Gerangelos <stefanos.gerangelos@vates.tech>
sgerag
force-pushed
the
dev/stefanos/network-mgmt-iface
branch
from
d7d54e6 to
af03630
Compare
4 participants
There are some use cases according to which the user would like to perform a network reconfiguration of the management interface by keeping the interface's name intact. This commit allows the user to run the xe-reset-networking script by requesting the aforementioned behavior.