From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1N6EQ2-00021b-0k for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 05 Nov 2009 21:19:18 -0500 Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1N6EPx-0001we-Ag for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 05 Nov 2009 21:19:17 -0500 Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=55351 helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1N6EPx-0001wP-4k for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 05 Nov 2009 21:19:13 -0500 Received: from mx20.gnu.org ([199.232.41.8]:14959) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS-1.0:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1N6EPw-0002F7-Sa for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 05 Nov 2009 21:19:13 -0500 Received: from mail2.shareable.org ([80.68.89.115]) by mx20.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1N6EPv-0006or-QY for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 05 Nov 2009 21:19:11 -0500 Date: Fri, 6 Nov 2009 02:19:10 +0000 From: Jamie Lokier Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 0/4] net-bridge: rootless bridge support for qemu Message-ID: <20091106021910.GM21630@shareable.org> References: <1257294485-27015-1-git-send-email-aliguori@us.ibm.com> <4AF2E247.3090409@redhat.com> <4AF2E7CE.8010506@us.ibm.com> <4AF2EB17.8090202@redhat.com> <4AF2F04B.8050105@redhat.com> <4AF2F63C.6060204@us.ibm.com> <4AF2F85E.6020603@redhat.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <4AF2F85E.6020603@redhat.com> List-Id: qemu-devel.nongnu.org List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Avi Kivity Cc: Mark McLoughlin , Anthony Liguori , Arnd Bergmann , Juan Quintela , Dustin Kirkland , qemu-devel@nongnu.org, Michael Tsirkin Avi Kivity wrote: > I don't see why you consider placing functionality in the > management stack vs qemu user hostile, considering who our users are. Do you mean that virtually all users use a management stack? -- Jamie