On 04/24/13 10:42, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
On Wed, Apr 24, 2013 at 10:38:26AM +0200, Peter Krempa wrote:
On 04/24/13 10:19, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
On Tue, Apr 23, 2013 at 08:57:10PM +0200, Peter Krempa wrote:
On 04/23/13 18:21, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
On Tue, Apr 23, 2013 at 03:46:12PM +0200, Peter Krempa wrote:
With autoport enabled, both ports were alocated. With enabling defaultMode or setting separate channel modes one of the ports may not be needed. This will allow later on doing this kind of change. --- docs/formatdomain.html.in | 2 +- src/conf/domain_conf.c | 5 ----- 2 files changed, 1 insertion(+), 6 deletions(-)
diff --git a/docs/formatdomain.html.in b/docs/formatdomain.html.in index 888c005..bb75943 100644 --- a/docs/formatdomain.html.in +++ b/docs/formatdomain.html.in @@ -3470,7 +3470,7 @@ qemu-kvm -net nic,model=? /dev/null while <code>tlsPort</code> gives an alternative secure port number. The <code>autoport</code> attribute is the new preferred syntax for indicating autoallocation of - both port numbers. The <code>listen</code> attribute is + needed port numbers. The <code>listen</code> attribute is an IP address for the server to listen on. The <code>passwd</code> attribute provides a SPICE password in clear text. The <code>keymap</code>
...
If we're allocating ports then we *must* be setting autoport='yes'. Having port='1' and tlsPort='-1' and autoport='no' is a non-sensical configuration.
Okay, that is fair enough.
In that case, is it okay not to allocate both ports if the configuration doesn't require it even if we did so before? Or do we need to have an option to force allocation of both TLS and non-tls port even if it's not needed?
Sure, we don't need to allocate both ports, if TLS is disabled in libvirtd, or if the configuration does not otherwise require it
Great, in that case I'll incorporate the doc hunk from this patch into the next one in this series as that patch makes this change and I'll drop this one. Peter