From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Joanna Rutkowska Subject: Re: Xen 4.1.x security support Date: Wed, 18 Sep 2013 10:50:51 +0200 Message-ID: <5239696B.7070209@invisiblethingslab.com> References: <52377FC0.6000302@invisiblethingslab.com> <5238172E02000078000F3DBB@nat28.tlf.novell.com> <52389387.10008@invisiblethingslab.com> <52389516.7020905@invisiblethingslab.com> <523982DC02000078000F4420@nat28.tlf.novell.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============5865887629179165798==" Return-path: In-Reply-To: <523982DC02000078000F4420@nat28.tlf.novell.com> List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org Errors-To: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org To: Jan Beulich Cc: marmarek@invisiblethingslab.com, "xen-devel@lists.xen.org" List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org This is an OpenPGP/MIME signed message (RFC 2440 and 3156) --===============5865887629179165798== Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="------------enig859CB75C31B027BAF6C92D4E" This is an OpenPGP/MIME signed message (RFC 2440 and 3156) --------------enig859CB75C31B027BAF6C92D4E Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On 09/18/13 10:39, Jan Beulich wrote: >>>> On 17.09.13 at 19:44, Joanna Rutkowska wrote: >> And a somehow more general thought: what most people expect from >> baremetal hypervisors, I think, is stability. Unlike the Linux kernel,= >> the Xen hypervisor does not need to support each and every device >> invented on the planet, each and every possible filesystem, or >> networking stack, etc. That's, in fact, (one of) the biggest advantage= >> of a hypervisor over a monolithic kernel. So, why, oh why, such a race= >> to keep bumping the major version over and over again? >=20 > In fact I'm the (so far apparently only) one trying to stop further > accelerating the release schedule from its original 9 month cycle. > I don't recall you having chimed in when the release schedule for > 4.4 in particular and the shortening of the release cycle in general > was discussed on the mailing list. There were arguments in favor > of the shortening which I certainly appreciate. >=20 Well, I'm not regular on xen-devel, because I'm not a Xen developer, really. I'm a _user_ of Xen. In an ideal world we (Qubes OS project) should not even maintain a fork of Xen, nor be at xen-devel at all. I just came here now because I'm worried that the team I'm leading, the users of Xen, will now need to spend considerable amount of time on upgrading our product to Xen 4.2, because Xen 4.1 security support is ending soon. I can imagine there are more users of Xen who would share my worries, hopefully they will come to this threat sooner or later and back me up :) joanna. --------------enig859CB75C31B027BAF6C92D4E Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJSOWlrAAoJEJwtLfzExk0LQFcH/286xThgpkte9YePheDJyYTv i5NtVfrfXxmHzPMKjLye8Ffth7ttNRtlXkpR/Mlon/WXZ2qitymkOTioDC4aWfJY 2Kew0msaaNSvg6ncG2p2B8fIoQupeDWBy1oqOPckL8DQfamwTyl41wFQqhybtfUS fbGixXz+43jBwE2BDkHlLmpKLRShWU1jTDv+LD7AoUtKZt2AEKz96dsD/V0A9ONr aLcVZkKARSCs3HdwFV2j2fJlMyQxArh1fuEmUtdX8TXg7CGghYuln+ztiBvopiFN 8sTuXQUdweCZhURG9g1R05tI0e4NFkFvUCOSmk82edAgtfXjgkM/H6CMrtaoGPQ= =G3H4 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --------------enig859CB75C31B027BAF6C92D4E-- --===============5865887629179165798== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@lists.xen.org http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel --===============5865887629179165798==--