On 4/2/09 10:03 AM, "Alan Altmark" <[email protected]> wrote: > Why would you want or expect VM TCP/IP to use DIAG2A8? It already has a > working device driver, so there's not much point in spending money to > redesign and test a new driver that has the same functionality as the old > one.
Because as you start to think about guest mobility and dynamic migration, the abstraction between what physical device you use vs a VSWITCH managing the physical adapters and the VM TCPIP stack interacting only with a virtual adapter would be valuable. It's also As I said, it's an interesting idea. You don't have to do anything about it, but I think you're going to end up doing it to start simplifying the number and type of devices that you have to support in the core stack. The current code isn't broken, but that's a lot of special cases not to have to maintain if you could start thinking in terms of a single abstract approach. -- db ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For LINUX-390 subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO LINUX-390 or visit http://www.marist.edu/htbin/wlvindex?LINUX-390
