On Wed, 2020-07-15 at 16:11 +0200, Andrea Bolognani wrote:
On Wed, 2020-07-15 at 14:25 +0100, Daniel P. Berrangé wrote:
On Wed, Jul 15, 2020 at 02:25:14PM +0200, Andrea Bolognani wrote:
Mh, that makes sense but I'm still wary of using "proxy" due to the potential for confusion, since in this case the proxy is on the opposite side of the connection than one would probably expect it to be. Something like "remoteproxy" or "serverproxy", perhaps?
I don't think there's really any problem of confusion here unless someone doesn't read the docs at all, in which case they won't even know about this parameter. So I don't think using a more verbose term is any benefit.
Okay.
The other day I randomly realized the ssh-based transports already accept a 'netcat' URI parameter which can be used to point libvirt to a non-standard nc stand-in. With that in mind, is it really necessary to introduce another URI parameter? Can't we just reuse the existing one? -- Andrea Bolognani / Red Hat / Virtualization