Re: [Libvir] Remote patch, 2007-02-28
On Tue, Mar 06, 2007 at 11:25:32AM +0000, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
>I'm not sure what you mean by 'expose the remote interface directly' ?
>Do you mean allow arbitrary non-libvirt clients to speak to the server
>daemon directly, or something else ?
I've been wondering this morning what reasons clients would have for
wanting to reverse-engineer/reimplement the wire protocol. If they're
using an obscure language without libvirt support? (Answer: write some
libvirt bindings, stupid!) If they're using an obscure language which
lacks a C FFI? If they have license problems with libvirt?
Keeping C library based binding for a Java application is really
annoying, and JNI is like designed to make this hard. I would expect
large clusters monitoring solutions to be often Java based and we
need to have a network API for those use case. Whether the Sun-RPC
based one is the answer I don't think so, I guess they would be far
better off with XML-RPC, in term of existing libraries, tools, and
knowledge of programming the beast.
Daniel
--
Red Hat Virtualization group http://redhat.com/virtualization/
Daniel Veillard | virtualization library http://libvirt.org/
veillard(a)redhat.com | libxml GNOME XML XSLT toolkit http://xmlsoft.org/
http://veillard.com/ | Rpmfind RPM search engine http://rpmfind.net/