From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43)
	id 1ELoWE-00075e-51
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Sat, 01 Oct 2005 17:03:42 -0400
Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43)
	id 1ELoW9-00072s-QQ
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Sat, 01 Oct 2005 17:03:38 -0400
Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1ELoW8-000712-91
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Sat, 01 Oct 2005 17:03:36 -0400
Received: from [144.85.15.72] (helo=mail.eclis.ch)
	by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.34) id 1ELoNL-0002L9-GO
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Sat, 01 Oct 2005 16:54:31 -0400
Message-ID: <433EF785.5030401@eclis.ch>
Date: Sat, 01 Oct 2005 22:54:29 +0200
From: Jean-Christian de Rivaz <jc@eclis.ch>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] tun/tap networking
References: <20050930221321.C7BED31C14@ravel.n2.net>	<20050930230149.GA20433@jbrown.mylinuxbox.org>	<433E44F9.8040501@eclis.ch>
	<Pine.LNX.4.61.0510011947470.15331@filer.marasystems.com>
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.61.0510011947470.15331@filer.marasystems.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Reply-To: qemu-devel@nongnu.org
List-Id: qemu-devel.nongnu.org
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.gnu.org/pipermail/qemu-devel>
List-Post: <mailto:qemu-devel@nongnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=subscribe>
To: qemu-devel@nongnu.org

Henrik Nordstrom a =E9crit :
> On Sat, 1 Oct 2005, Jean-Christian de Rivaz wrote:
>=20
>> You point the real question: why it has been impossible to get=20
>> accepted any patch that fixed this. I has proposed one myself and I=20
>> get no comment at all. I see similar effort from others and obviousely=
=20
>> there failed almost the same way. No getting any valuable comment=20
>> about why a idea proposed by many peopoles is not applyed make this=20
>> subject very hard.
>=20
>=20
> I think it is in part due to the command line parsing of network=20
> parameters being all crap and need to be replaced by something more san=
e.

Ok. So if the command line parsing of network parameters is crap for=20
someone, he is free to improve it. But, sorry, I found that not a valid=20
excuse to silently reject others featurs to the network setup. I will be=20
very happy to modify the patch I propose to be compliant with a new=20
network parameters parsing code.

>> I hope that we can resolve this subject, because in my point of view,=20
>> using a existing "tun" is far more simpler than create one the way=20
>> quemu do
>=20
>=20
> I agree that persistent tun tap devices is much easier to work with.

Thanks. :-)
--=20
Jean-Christian de Rivaz