On Wed, May 17, 2017 at 08:16:58 -0400, Laine Stump wrote:
On 05/17/2017 03:51 AM, Vasiliy Tolstov wrote:
2017-05-17 4:25 GMT+03:00 Laine Stump <laine@laine.org>:
Oh, and I forgot to point out here (although I did in the original thread last fall) that a toplevel <link state='blah'/> historically only affects the state of the interface in the guest. If it began affecting the state of the tap device in the host as well, there would be unexpected (and undesireable) consequences.
So as i understand xml for this feature looks right. I found one minor issue, and send v2 shortly, but i want to know, does this will be accepted by upstream?
Well, *I* think I've given sufficient reasons for having the two link states controlled separately, but since Dan and Peter had questioned its usefulness, we should see whether or not I've swayed their opinions :-)
I think we should have two elements in this case. I just don't consider setting the host link side to be very useful.