[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Simplified protocol?



On 11/15/18 8:41 AM, Wouter Verhelst wrote:

>> implementation should include. The above sounds like a good start,
>> indeed.
> 
> So, I gave this some more thought today and came up with the below. Any
> comments?


> +### Baseline
> +
> +The following MUST be implemented by all implementations, and should be
> +considered a baseline:
> +
> +- NOTLS mode
> +- The fixed newstyle handshake
> +- During the handshake:
> +
> +    - the `NBD_OPT_INFO` and `NBD_OPT_GO` messages, with the
> +      `NBD_INFO_EXPORT` response.
> +    - Servers that receive messages which they do not implement MUST
> +      reply to them with `NBD_OPT_UNSUP`, and MUST NOT fail to parse
> +      the next message received.
> +    - the `NBD_OPT_ABORT` message, and its response.
> +    - the `NBD_OPT_LIST` message and its response.
> +
> +- During the transmission phase:
> +
> +    - Simple replies
> +    - the `NBD_CMD_READ` message (and its response)
> +    - the `NBD_CMD_WRITE` message (and its response)
> +    - the `NBD_CMD_DISC` message

However, after edits made in the rest of the thread, the version that
was pushed claimed that NBD_CMD_DISC has a response, which is at odds
with what we state elsewhere. I've pushed the obvious cleanup.

-- 
Eric Blake, Principal Software Engineer
Red Hat, Inc.           +1-919-301-3226
Virtualization:  qemu.org | libvirt.org

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature


Reply to: