On Tue, Sep 01, 2015 at 02:11:05PM -0400, Laine Stump wrote:
On 08/31/2015 04:06 PM, Jonathan Toppins wrote:
On 08/31/2015 03:25 PM, Guido Günther wrote:
Hi, On Sat, Aug 29, 2015 at 04:19:10PM -0400, Jonathan Toppins wrote:
Adds a new interface type using UDP sockets, this seems only applicable to QEMU but have edited tree-wide to support the new interface type.
The interface type required the addition of a "localaddr" (local address), this then maps into the following xml and qemu call.
<interface type='udp'>
Sine we do have
<interface type='mcast'>
already wouldn't it be better to have something like
<interface type='ucast' protocol='udp'>
This possibly could be better, my concern would be now tcp is configured differently than udp, no? Or are you saying something like:
<interface type='ucast' protocol='udp|tcp'>
I think the case of a tcp connection is already handled by <interface type='client'> and <interface type='server'> together, so that doesn't seem likely to happen. I suppose it's possible someone would come up with an sctp-based transport in the future though. I'm undecided about this.
Yeah, given what we've done for TCP already, I don't really see any point in trying to invent a more generic type=ucast + protocol=udp|tcp. We might as well just stick with a simple type=udp Regards, Daniel -- |: http://berrange.com -o- http://www.flickr.com/photos/dberrange/ :| |: http://libvirt.org -o- http://virt-manager.org :| |: http://autobuild.org -o- http://search.cpan.org/~danberr/ :| |: http://entangle-photo.org -o- http://live.gnome.org/gtk-vnc :|