From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1NuDDs-0008RB-Au for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 23 Mar 2010 19:09:20 -0400 Received: from [140.186.70.92] (port=58036 helo=eggs.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1NuDDo-0008Pp-UV for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 23 Mar 2010 19:09:18 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1NuDDl-0000aD-Uu for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 23 Mar 2010 19:09:16 -0400 Received: from mail2.shareable.org ([80.68.89.115]:34296) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1NuDDl-0000Qx-QN for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 23 Mar 2010 19:09:13 -0400 Date: Tue, 23 Mar 2010 23:09:01 +0000 From: Jamie Lokier Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] Re: [libvirt] Supporting hypervisor specific APIs in libvirt Message-ID: <20100323230901.GA20130@shareable.org> References: <4BA7C40C.2040505@codemonkey.ws> <20100323145105.GV16253@redhat.com> <4BA8D8A9.7090308@codemonkey.ws> <201003231557.19474.paul@codesourcery.com> <4BA8E6FC.9080207@codemonkey.ws> <4BA901B5.3020704@redhat.com> <4BA91653.1020706@codemonkey.ws> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <4BA91653.1020706@codemonkey.ws> List-Id: qemu-devel.nongnu.org List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Anthony Liguori Cc: "libvir-list@redhat.com" , qemu-devel@nongnu.org, Avi Kivity , Paul Brook Anthony Liguori wrote: > (like mDNS or SLP). The later mechanism scales better and tends to > be more robust. (Aside: mDNS is blocked on some larger networks because it creates too much load. On those networks, an aggregator is essential - or a protocol which scales better (less broadcasting)). Doesn't libvirt use mDNS already to discover multiple hosts on a network, for remote access? If so, why can't exactly the same protocol be used to enumerate multiple VMs on each host? If not, why not? -- Jamie