Re: [libvirt PATCH 9/9] rpc: use new virt-nc binary for remote tunnelling
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