From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1Kmp72-0004xI-1Q for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 06 Oct 2008 08:22:56 -0400 Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1Kmp71-0004wK-1V for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 06 Oct 2008 08:22:55 -0400 Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=42611 helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Kmp70-0004wA-Ty for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 06 Oct 2008 08:22:54 -0400 Received: from mail.codesourcery.com ([65.74.133.4]:51998) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS-1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1Kmp70-0003R8-Kp for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 06 Oct 2008 08:22:54 -0400 From: Paul Brook Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH] USB over network Date: Mon, 6 Oct 2008 13:22:50 +0100 References: <200810061309.10270.paul@codesourcery.com> In-Reply-To: <200810061309.10270.paul@codesourcery.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: <200810061322.51341.paul@codesourcery.com> Reply-To: qemu-devel@nongnu.org List-Id: qemu-devel.nongnu.org List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: qemu-devel@nongnu.org Cc: Gal Hammer On Monday 06 October 2008, Paul Brook wrote: > > Attached is a preliminary patch which add QEmu the ability to use local > > USB devices over network. It should work with DOK devices and might work > > with web cameras. > > Apart from anything else, it's missing documentation. > > It looks like you have to start qemu with magic options on the remote > machine? This seems a very bad solution. The remote stub should be a > separate application which communicated via a documented protocol. > Preferably this should be a standardised protocol that is/can be suppoorted > by third party devices. As a specific example, have you looked at http://usbip.sourceforge.net/ ? It doesn't seem to be particularly active, but it's at least a useful reference point to see whether your remote protocol is sane. Paul