This is a quick note on a quick note, which seems to me to raise the question of the role of the negative in Deleuze:
I think you are saying that desire is both eros and eris, both break and flow, both connect and cut. So maybe it would be less misleading to talk of an « ontology of breaks and flows »
In a similar vein, Deleuze often talks in terms of positivity and affirmation, as if the negative were excluded from his ontology. Yet the recurrent prefix (that is to say operator) « de-« , as in deterritorialisation is an index of « good » negation that does not create lack but openness. Or the « dé-pli » the unfolding that accompanies the fold. Or « dé-faire » unmaking, as in unmaking the strata.
So your opposition of centrifugal flows and and centripetal oedipus may need to be at least complemented by the opposition of stratification and de-stratification. Centripetal/centrifugal suggests to me systole/diastole, and so are two poles of desiring flow. As in the commentaries on Francis Bacon.
Other indices of negativity are the prefix (operator) « a- » or « an-« , as in a-signifying, a-subjective, an-egoic. And also « in- » as in « in-forme ». So there seems to be a notion of « positive negativity », as in Deleuze and Guattari’s claim that deterritorialisation is primary.
This seems to be in accordance with your reading of Eris not as oppositional strife, but as a « force of dissipation ». So the desiring machine is a dissipative assemblage.