Re: [nfsv4] Draft RFC for ONC RPC over AF_VSOCK

Stefan Hajnoczi <stefanha@redhat.com> Tue, 07 November 2017 11:32 UTC

Return-Path: <stefanha@redhat.com>
X-Original-To: nfsv4@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: nfsv4@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3341213FDF1 for <nfsv4@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 7 Nov 2017 03:32:21 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.921
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.921 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id QZWq-sQ5x7M8 for <nfsv4@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 7 Nov 2017 03:32:19 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mx1.redhat.com (mx1.redhat.com [209.132.183.28]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9FD1313FDEE for <nfsv4@ietf.org>; Tue, 7 Nov 2017 03:32:19 -0800 (PST)
Received: from smtp.corp.redhat.com (int-mx01.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.11]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mx1.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8981F87649; Tue, 7 Nov 2017 11:32:18 +0000 (UTC)
DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mx1.redhat.com 8981F87649
Authentication-Results: ext-mx02.extmail.prod.ext.phx2.redhat.com; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=redhat.com
Authentication-Results: ext-mx02.extmail.prod.ext.phx2.redhat.com; spf=fail smtp.mailfrom=stefanha@redhat.com
Received: from localhost (ovpn-117-205.ams2.redhat.com [10.36.117.205]) by smtp.corp.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DEEED600D3; Tue, 7 Nov 2017 11:32:17 +0000 (UTC)
Date: Tue, 07 Nov 2017 11:32:10 +0000
From: Stefan Hajnoczi <stefanha@redhat.com>
To: "Daniel P. Berrange" <berrange@redhat.com>
Cc: Jeff Layton <jlayton@redhat.com>, Matt Benjamin <mbenjami@redhat.com>, Linux NFS Mailing List <linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org>, "J . Bruce Fields" <bfields@fieldses.org>, Chuck Lever <chuck.lever@oracle.com>, Steve Dickson <steved@redhat.com>, Anna Schumaker <Anna.Schumaker@netapp.com>, Trond Myklebust <trondmy@primarydata.com>, NFSv4 <nfsv4@ietf.org>
Message-ID: <20171107113210.GJ6809@stefanha-x1.localdomain>
References: <20171005200835.GA31525@stefanha-x1.localdomain> <CAKOnarmreQp6c8qM7x=ohGf1sAoj53qbE0bNvKxzyWLiS=2zKw@mail.gmail.com> <1509110202.4704.7.camel@redhat.com> <20171027132318.GC30686@redhat.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg="pgp-sha1"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="gBdJBemW82xJqIAr"
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20171027132318.GC30686@redhat.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.9.1 (2017-09-22)
X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.79 on 10.5.11.11
X-Greylist: Sender IP whitelisted, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.5.16 (mx1.redhat.com [10.5.110.26]); Tue, 07 Nov 2017 11:32:18 +0000 (UTC)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/nfsv4/CRDvVb7gW4QXqXWEdm4wedRWqu0>
X-Mailman-Approved-At: Tue, 07 Nov 2017 07:17:00 -0800
Subject: Re: [nfsv4] Draft RFC for ONC RPC over AF_VSOCK
X-BeenThere: nfsv4@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
Precedence: list
List-Id: NFSv4 Working Group <nfsv4.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/nfsv4>, <mailto:nfsv4-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/nfsv4/>
List-Post: <mailto:nfsv4@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:nfsv4-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/nfsv4>, <mailto:nfsv4-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 07 Nov 2017 11:32:21 -0000

On Fri, Oct 27, 2017 at 02:23:18PM +0100, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 27, 2017 at 09:16:42AM -0400, Jeff Layton wrote:
> > On Thu, 2017-10-05 at 16:50 -0400, Matt Benjamin wrote:
> > > Hi Stefan,
> > > 
> > > On Thu, Oct 5, 2017 at 4:08 PM, Stefan Hajnoczi <stefanha@redhat.com> wrote:
> > > > I have previously submitted patches that implement NFS client and nfsd
> > > > support for the AF_VSOCK address family.  In order for this to be
> > > > acceptable for merge the AF_VSOCK transport needs to be defined in an
> > > > IETF RFC.  Below is a draft RFC that defines ONC RPC over AF_VSOCK.
> > > > 
> > > > My patches use netid "vsock" but "tcpv" has also been suggested.  This draft
> > > > RFC still uses "vsock" but I'll update it to "tcpv" if there is consensus.
> > > > 
> > > 
> > > I think "vsock" is the appropriate netid, not "tcpv."  Stream
> > > orientation, if anything, is the general category containing TCP and
> > > VSOCK, not the reverse.  But really I think it's just more clear.
> > > 
> > 
> > Agreed. VSOCK is its own thing. It bears some resemblance to TCP, but
> > calling it tcpv would be confusing. IIRC, Chuck only proposed that when
> > we were discussing an alternative transport that would look more like a
> > typical network.
> > 
> > BTW: Does VSOCK have a connectionless mode, analogous to UDP? If so,
> > then it may be nice to consider what the netid for that might look like
> > as well, before we settle on any names.
> 
> Yes, you can use SOCK_STREAM or SOCK_DGRAM when using vsock.

VMware has implemented both SOCK_STREAM and SOCK_DGRAM.

The virtio-vsock and Hyper-V drivers implement only SOCK_STREAM at the
moment.  In the future they may support SOCK_DGRAM if there are use
cases.

Stefan