On 03/12/12 19:45, Yonit Halperin wrote: > Hi, > On 03/12/2012 03:50 PM, Gerd Hoffmann wrote: >> Hi, >> >>> Can you explain/exemplify, why sending data as a blob (either by (a) or >>> (b)), that is verified only by the two ends that actually use it, is a >>> problem? >> >> It tends to be not very robust. Especially when the creating/parsing is >> done ad-hoc and the format changes now and then due to more info needing >> to be stored later on. The qemu migration format which has almost no >> structure breaks now and then because of that. Thus I'd prefer to not >> go down this route when creating something new. >> >> cheers, >> Gerd > > Exposing spice server internals to the client/qemu seems to me more > vulnerable then sending it as a blob.
That also depends on what and how much we need to transfer. > Nonetheless, it introduces more > complexity to backward compatibility support and it will need to involve > not only the capabilities/versions of the server but also those of the > qemu/client Backward compatibility isn't that easy both ways. >.Which reminds me, that we also need capabilities > negotiation for the migration protocol between the src and the destination. If this is a hard requirement then using the vmstate channel isn't going to work. The vmstate is a one-way channel, no way to negotiate anything between source and target. cheers, Gerd
