On Fri, 7 Apr 2017 08:58:15 -0500 Eric Blake <ebl...@redhat.com> wrote:
> On 04/07/2017 06:18 AM, Cornelia Huck wrote: > > From: Jing Liu <liuj...@linux.vnet.ibm.com> > > > > This introduces basic support for TN3270, which needs to negotiate > > three Telnet options during handshake: > > - End of Record > > - Binary Transmission > > - Terminal-Type > > > > As a basic implementation, this simply ignores NOP and Interrupt > > Process(IP) commands. More work should be done for them later. > > > > For more details, please refer to RFC 854 and 1576. > > > > Signed-off-by: Jing Liu <liuj...@linux.vnet.ibm.com> > > Signed-off-by: Yang Chen <bjcy...@linux.vnet.ibm.com> > > Reviewed-by: QingFeng Hao <ha...@linux.vnet.ibm.com> > > Acked-by: Dong Jia Shi <bjsdj...@linux.vnet.ibm.com> > > Signed-off-by: Cornelia Huck <cornelia.h...@de.ibm.com> > > --- > > > +++ b/qapi-schema.json > > @@ -4874,6 +4874,8 @@ > > # @nodelay: set TCP_NODELAY socket option (default: false) > > # @telnet: enable telnet protocol on server > > # sockets (default: false) > > +# @tn3270: enable tn3270 protocol on server > > +# sockets (default: false) (Since: 2.10) > > # @reconnect: For a client socket, if a socket is disconnected, > > # then attempt a reconnect after the given number of seconds. > > # Setting this to zero disables this function. (default: 0) > > @@ -4887,6 +4889,7 @@ > > '*wait' : 'bool', > > '*nodelay' : 'bool', > > '*telnet' : 'bool', > > + '*tn3270' : 'bool', > > '*reconnect' : 'int' }, > > 'base': 'ChardevCommon' } > > I almost wonder if we should make this a flat union, so that members > that only make sense with the server side (such as tn3270) or with the > client side (reconnect) can only be present when that branch of the > union is taken. But that may break back-compat if we have existing code > that silently ignores a member that makes no sense, and we start > forcefully warning about the member being present. The existing mix of server and client side members is a bit unfortunate, but I'm not sure it's worth spending effort on this. Anyway, I'd defer that to the chardev maintainers :) > At any rate, making > such a change is not a prerequisite for this series. Would be nice if this is fine as-is.
