I agree -- that could be useful later. Given that, maybe we should call the netids something like: vsockc: connected vsock vsockd: datagram vsock AIUI, netids are just something we inherited from Sun when we got the TI-RPC library. I don't think they are governed by any sort of names+numbers authority, are they? If not then we're probably define it to whatever we wish, though it might be a good idea to talk to the Solaris folks and see if they have any input as to the naming. -- Jeff On Fri, 2017-10-27 at 09:27 -0400, Matt Benjamin wrote: > Hi Jeff, > > This doc says they are: > https://vmsplice.net/~stefan/stefanha-kvm-forum-2015.pdf > > But only stream sockets are mentioned here: > https://wiki.qemu.org/Features/VirtioVsock > > Trond and Chuck suggested in an offline conversation a few weeks ago > that they could imagine a datagram version of the transport being > useful. It's probably worth passing that alone. > > Matt > > On Fri, Oct 27, 2017 at 9:16 AM, Jeff Layton <jlayton@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Thu, 2017-10-05 at 16:50 -0400, Matt Benjamin wrote: > > > Hi Stefan, > > > > > > On Thu, Oct 5, 2017 at 4:08 PM, Stefan Hajnoczi <stefanha@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > I have previously submitted patches that implement NFS client and nfsd > > > > support for the AF_VSOCK address family. In order for this to be > > > > acceptable for merge the AF_VSOCK transport needs to be defined in an > > > > IETF RFC. Below is a draft RFC that defines ONC RPC over AF_VSOCK. > > > > > > > > My patches use netid "vsock" but "tcpv" has also been suggested. This draft > > > > RFC still uses "vsock" but I'll update it to "tcpv" if there is consensus. > > > > > > > > > > I think "vsock" is the appropriate netid, not "tcpv." Stream > > > orientation, if anything, is the general category containing TCP and > > > VSOCK, not the reverse. But really I think it's just more clear. > > > > > > > Agreed. VSOCK is its own thing. It bears some resemblance to TCP, but > > calling it tcpv would be confusing. IIRC, Chuck only proposed that when > > we were discussing an alternative transport that would look more like a > > typical network. > > > > BTW: Does VSOCK have a connectionless mode, analogous to UDP? If so, > > then it may be nice to consider what the netid for that might look like > > as well, before we settle on any names. > > -- > > Jeff Layton <jlayton@xxxxxxxxxx> > > > -- Jeff Layton <jlayton@xxxxxxxxxx> -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-nfs" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html