Re: Is vTPM the right name for the new functionality?

[Jarkko Sakkinen <jarkko.sakkinen-VuQAYsv1563Yd54FQh9/CA@public.gmane.org>]

On Fri, Mar 11, 2016 at 10:26:26AM -0500, Stefan Berger wrote:
>    Jarkko Sakkinen <jarkko.sakkinen-VuQAYsv1563Yd54FQh9/CA@public.gmane.org> wrote on 03/11/2016
>    05:43:04 AM:
> 
>    >
>    > Hi Stefan,
>    >
>    > This is something I would like discuss and get other points of views.
>    >
>    > The thing that I would like to rise is the name of this new subsystem.
>    > The keyword 'vTPM' is already heavily referenced in contexts for more
>    > "full stack" solution of virtualization [1].
>    >
>    > If I look at this new functionality it is essentially a proxy and not
>    > much else, isn't it? You can apply for Linux containers but alone it is
>    > proxy tool. With the current name it is too easy to confuse it with
>    > existing solutions.
> 
>    Fine by me. I can rename it to tpm_proxy.c and reference to it as the
>    virtual TPM proxy driver or TPM emulator proxy driver, which I think
>    describes it well. It's not a 'Proxy TPM'.
>    The title of the cover letter for the patches would then be
> 
>    Multi-instance vTPM proxy driver

Sounds fair. And I enjoyed reading that research paper :)

>      Stefan

/Jarkko

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Transform Data into Opportunity.
Accelerate data analysis in your applications with
Intel Data Analytics Acceleration Library.
Click to learn more.
http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=278785111&iu=/4140