> -----Original Message----- > From: kvm-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:kvm-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On > Behalf Of Jeremy Fitzhardinge > The trouble is that it presumes that the host and guest (or whoever the > endpoints are) are on the same physical machine and will remain that > way. Given that live migration is a feature that people seem to like, > then you'd end up needing to transport this protocol over a real network > anyway - and at that point you may as well use proper TCP/IP. The > alternative is to say either "if you use this feature you can't migrate, > and you can only resume on the same host", or "you can use this feature, > and we'll work out a global namespace and proxy it over TCP for you". > Neither seems very satisfactory. [IH] when migrating a guest to another host, migration takes care of closing/opening of the VMChannel on the target host. The VMChannel is local to the hypervisor, not accessible via network. Migration is not an issue requiring the VMChannel to use TCP/IP. _______________________________________________ Virtualization mailing list Virtualization@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/virtualization
