From: Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy@goop.org>
To: Anthony Liguori <anthony@codemonkey.ws>
Cc: David Miller <davem@davemloft.net>,
netdev@vger.kernel.org, kvm@vger.kernel.org,
virtualization@lists.linux-foundation.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] AF_VMCHANNEL address family for guest<->host communication.
Date: Mon, 15 Dec 2008 09:45:56 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <494697D4.6080300@goop.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4946717F.2090809@codemonkey.ws>
Anthony Liguori wrote:
> David Miller wrote:
>
>> From: Gleb Natapov <gleb@redhat.com>
>> Date: Sun, 14 Dec 2008 13:50:55 +0200
>>
>>
>>
>>> It is undesirable to use TCP/IP for this purpose since network
>>> connectivity may not exist between host and guest and if it exists the
>>> traffic can be not routable between host and guest for security reasons
>>> or TCP/IP traffic can be firewalled (by mistake) by unsuspecting VM user.
>>>
>>>
>> I don't really accept this argument, sorry.
>>
Yes. There's no reason why the management stack couldn't implement its
own private idiot-proofing network for this kind of thing.
> Each of these sockets are going to be connected to a backend (to
> implement guest<=>copy/paste for instance). We want to implement those
> backends in userspace and preferably in QEMU.
>
> Using some raw protocol over ethernet means you don't have reliability.
> If you use a protocol to get reliability (like TCP), you now have to
> implement a full TCP/IP stack in userspace or get the host kernel
> involved. I'd rather not get the host kernel involved from a security
> perspective.
>
There's nothing wrong with user-mode TCP, or you could run your TCP
stack in a special-purpose guest if you're really paranoid.
> An inherently reliable socket transport solves the above problem while
> keeping things simple. Note, this is not a new concept. There is
> already an AF_IUCV for s390. VMware is also developing an AF_VMCI
> socket family.
>
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.
J
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2008-12-15 17:45 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 29+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2008-12-14 11:50 [PATCH] AF_VMCHANNEL address family for guest<->host communication Gleb Natapov
2008-12-14 12:23 ` Evgeniy Polyakov
2008-12-14 12:46 ` Gleb Natapov
2008-12-15 6:44 ` David Miller
2008-12-15 7:48 ` Gleb Natapov
2008-12-15 8:27 ` David Miller
2008-12-15 15:02 ` Anthony Liguori
2008-12-15 17:45 ` Jeremy Fitzhardinge [this message]
2008-12-15 18:26 ` Itamar Heim
2008-12-15 18:45 ` Anthony Liguori
2008-12-15 22:52 ` Jeremy Fitzhardinge
2008-12-15 23:08 ` Anthony Liguori
2008-12-15 23:44 ` Jeremy Fitzhardinge
2008-12-15 23:52 ` Evgeniy Polyakov
2008-12-16 0:01 ` Dor Laor
2008-12-15 19:43 ` David Miller
2008-12-15 20:44 ` Anthony Liguori
2008-12-15 22:29 ` David Miller
2008-12-15 23:01 ` Anthony Liguori
2008-12-15 23:10 ` David Miller
2008-12-15 23:17 ` Anthony Liguori
2008-12-16 2:55 ` Herbert Xu
2008-12-15 23:13 ` Stephen Hemminger
2008-12-15 23:45 ` Evgeniy Polyakov
2008-12-16 6:57 ` Gleb Natapov
2008-12-16 21:25 ` Evgeniy Polyakov
2008-12-16 23:20 ` Dor Laor
2008-12-17 14:31 ` Gleb Natapov
2008-12-18 12:30 ` Evgeniy Polyakov
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=494697D4.6080300@goop.org \
--to=jeremy@goop.org \
--cc=anthony@codemonkey.ws \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=kvm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=virtualization@lists.linux-foundation.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox