On Mon, Jan 4, 2021 at 8:24 AM Peter Krempa <pkrempa@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Tue, Dec 29, 2020 at 15:21:25 -0600, Ryan Gahagan wrote:
> + <define name="diskSourceNetworkProtocolNFS">
> + <element name="source">
> + <interleave>
> + <attribute name="protocol">
> + <choice>
> + <value>nfs</value>
> + </choice>
> + </attribute>
> + <attribute name="name"/>
> + <ref name="diskSourceCommon"/>
> + <ref name="diskSourceNetworkHost"/>
This allows also 'port' and non TCP transports. It's okay to simplify
the schema though and use the generic type. The code will need to reject
those when we'll validate whether the disk is possible to represent for
qemu.
Just to be 100% clear, does this mean we can leave the diskSourceNetworkProtocolNFS element definition as is and simply enforce the port omission/tcp transport in the code? Or would you prefer that we re-write the schema to use a custom variety of the diskSourceNetworkHost which only supports tcp and has no port option?
