Return-Path: Received: from fieldses.org ([173.255.197.46]:50954 "EHLO fieldses.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750733AbdISRYx (ORCPT ); Tue, 19 Sep 2017 13:24:53 -0400 Date: Tue, 19 Sep 2017 13:24:52 -0400 From: "J. Bruce Fields" To: "Daniel P. Berrange" Cc: Chuck Lever , Stefan Hajnoczi , Steve Dickson , Linux NFS Mailing List , Matt Benjamin , Jeff Layton Subject: Re: [PATCH nfs-utils v3 00/14] add NFS over AF_VSOCK support Message-ID: <20170919172452.GB29104@fieldses.org> References: <20170915133145.GA23557@fieldses.org> <20170915164223.GE23557@fieldses.org> <20170918180927.GD12759@stefanha-x1.localdomain> <20170919093140.GF9536@redhat.com> <67608054-B771-44F4-8B2F-5F7FDC506CDD@oracle.com> <20170919151051.GS9536@redhat.com> <3534278B-FC7B-4AA5-AF86-92AA19BFD1DC@oracle.com> <20170919164427.GV9536@redhat.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii In-Reply-To: <20170919164427.GV9536@redhat.com> Sender: linux-nfs-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Tue, Sep 19, 2017 at 05:44:27PM +0100, Daniel P. Berrange wrote: > On Tue, Sep 19, 2017 at 11:48:10AM -0400, Chuck Lever wrote: > > > > > On Sep 19, 2017, at 11:10 AM, Daniel P. Berrange wrote: > > > VSOCK requires no guest configuration, it won't be broken accidentally > > > by NetworkManager (or equivalent), it won't be mistakenly blocked by > > > guest admin/OS adding "deny all" default firewall policy. Similar > > > applies on the host side, and since there's separation from IP networking, > > > there is no possibility of the guest ever getting a channel out to the > > > LAN, even if the host is mis-configurated. > > > > We don't seem to have configuration fragility problems with other > > deployments that scale horizontally. > > > > IMO you should focus on making IP reliable rather than trying to > > move familiar IP-based services to other network fabrics. > > I don't see that ever happening, except in a scenario where a single > org is in tight control of the whole stack (host & guest), which is > not the case for cloud in general - only some on-site clouds. Can you elaborate? I think we're having trouble understanding why you can't just say "don't do that" to someone whose guest configuration is interfering with the network interface they need for NFS. --b.