From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:50495) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1cillD-0004ck-RN for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 28 Feb 2017 12:40:28 -0500 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1cillA-0005mI-Q1 for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 28 Feb 2017 12:40:27 -0500 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:49174) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1cillA-0005lM-Jf for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 28 Feb 2017 12:40:24 -0500 Date: Tue, 28 Feb 2017 17:40:19 +0000 From: "Dr. David Alan Gilbert" Message-ID: <20170228174018.GJ2773@work-vm> References: <20170223105155.GA2383@work-vm> <20170223110433.GL10047@redhat.com> <20170223114045.GB2383@work-vm> <20170226203427.6xjmuvt6okc356e5@var.youpi.perso.aquilenet.fr> <20170228165445.GG2773@work-vm> <20170228165730.ovdh4k6psrd3qv33@var.youpi.perso.aquilenet.fr> <20170228170017.GH2773@work-vm> <20170228170235.4xtrld37c6ymj5ko@var.youpi.perso.aquilenet.fr> <20170228170925.GI2773@work-vm> <20170228171219.ndea2aouukv4tivr@var.youpi.perso.aquilenet.fr> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20170228171219.ndea2aouukv4tivr@var.youpi.perso.aquilenet.fr> Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v4 4/5] slirp: VMStatify socket level List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Samuel Thibault Cc: "Daniel P. Berrange" , Juan Quintela , qemu-devel@nongnu.org, jan.kiszka@siemens.com, maethor@subiron.org * Samuel Thibault (samuel.thibault@gnu.org) wrote: > Dr. David Alan Gilbert, on mar. 28 f=E9vr. 2017 17:09:26 +0000, wrote: > > but only for Linux. >=20 > That's what I was referring to. Yes I think that's OK because: a) The alternative breaks all backwards migration b) This doesn't casuse any problem for forward migration There is another way, we could add a subsection that's sent whenever we use non-IPv4; that would (probably) fail noisily on a backwards migration to an old setup. But IMHO it's not worth it in this case given how rare a backwards migration of an IPv6 slirp connection on something other than Linux is. Dave > Samuel -- Dr. David Alan Gilbert / dgilbert@redhat.com / Manchester, UK