On Fri, 2011-07-01 at 15:46 +0200, Alexander Graf wrote: > > That's pretty impressive (if it does not come at the expensive of > > features that Qemu's slirp code has) - and the thing is that we don't > > actually have to implement the vast majority of TCP-IP features, > > because the transport between the guest and the host is obviously > > reliable. > > I don't see how it would. Once you overrun device buffers, you have to > do something. Either you drop packets or you stall the guest. I'd > usually prefer the former :). If we make the buffers large enough, will this matter in practice? > > This patch-set turned out to be a *lot* more simple than i first > > thought it would end up. > > > > Simpler also means potentially faster and potentially more secure. > > > > ( The lack of ipv6 is not something we should worry about too much, > > ipv4 should scale up to a couple of hundred thousand virtual > > machines per box, right? ) > > Well, if the system you're trying to connect to supports ipv4, sure. > If it doesn't, tough luck :). Does that mean that the guests would effectively be ipv4-only? That'd be unfortunate. Pekka -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kvm" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
