Il 25/05/2012 15:30, Luiz Capitulino ha scritto: > On Fri, 25 May 2012 15:19:28 +0200 > Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >> Il 25/05/2012 15:18, Luiz Capitulino ha scritto: >>>>> >>>>> Still not sure what you mean... >>> I meant it's a similar case. kqemu was a special case and maintenance burden. >>> We've dropped it and didn't regret. What's stopping us from doing the same >>> thing with vlans? >> >> That we have an alternative, and that -net dump is actually useful. > > I haven't reviewed the series yet, but -net dump can work without this, > can't it? -net dump requires putting a back-end, a front-end and the dump client in the same VLAN. So it is quite useless without this. > It's always possible to have alternatives in qemu, the point is how far > we're going on bloating it. > >>>>> we removed kqemu and didn't give an >>>>> alternative. This time we are providing an alternative. >>> Alternatives already exist, we don't have to provide them. >> >> Alternatives that require you to have root privileges (anything >> involving libvirt or iptables) are not really alternatives. > > It seems to me that vde doesn't require root, but even if it does, moving > this outside of qemu would also be feasible. Yeah, VDE probably includes something like an hub. But then we could drop even "-net socket", "-net udp", "-net dump", and only leave in vde+tap+slirp. Or even move slirp into VDE. :) That's a very different thing. Do distributions package VDE at all? Paolo -- 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
