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 :| -- libvir-list mailing list libvir-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/libvir-list