lists.openwall.net   lists  /  announce  owl-users  owl-dev  john-users  john-dev  passwdqc-users  yescrypt  popa3d-users  /  oss-security  kernel-hardening  musl  sabotage  tlsify  passwords  /  crypt-dev  xvendor  /  Bugtraq  Full-Disclosure  linux-kernel  linux-netdev  linux-ext4  linux-hardening  linux-cve-announce  PHC 
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
 
Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.
[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date:   Fri, 30 Nov 2018 08:34:54 -0500
From:   "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@...hat.com>
To:     Jason Wang <jasowang@...hat.com>
Cc:     jiangyiwen <jiangyiwen@...wei.com>, stefanha@...hat.com,
        stefanha@...il.com, netdev@...r.kernel.org, kvm@...r.kernel.org,
        virtualization@...ts.linux-foundation.org
Subject: Re: [RFC] Discuss about an new idea "Vsock over Virtio-net"

On Fri, Nov 30, 2018 at 08:55:17PM +0800, Jason Wang wrote:
> 
> On 2018/11/30 下午8:52, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> > > >    If you want to compare it with
> > > > something that would be TCP or QUIC.  The fundamental difference between
> > > > virtio-vsock and e.g. TCP is that TCP operates in a packet loss environment.
> > > > So they are using timers for reliability, and receiver is always free to
> > > > discard any unacked data.
> > > Virtio-net knows nothing above L2, so they are totally transparent to device
> > > itself. I still don't get why not using virtio-net instead.
> > > 
> > > 
> > > Thanks
> > Is your question why is virtio-vsock used instead of TCP on top of IP
> > on top of virtio-net?
> > 
> > 
> 
> No, my question is why not do vsock through virtio-net.
> 
> Thanks

Because apps need reliability, multiplexing and flow control and
virtio-net does not provide it.

-- 
MST

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ