Re: [Xen-users] Xen 4.2.0 Release Plan / TODO

[Mark van Dijk <lists+xen@internecto.net>]

Quoting Ian Campbell's message from 03 sep 2012:
>    * [CHECK] More formally deprecate xm/xend. Manpage patches already
>      in tree. Needs release noting and communication around -rc1 to
>      remind people to test xl. (DONE)

I'm just wondering if it's properly stated somewhere that the 'vfb' line
in a VM's config has been replaced with things like:

vnc=1
vnclisten="0.0.0.0"
vncdisplay="10"

This reminds me of a few things I found with regards to VNC just now,
while testing the upstream qemu with Xen (both master and version
1.1-stable).

1) While the above syntax, it is also possible to have
'vnclisten="0.0.0.0:10"'. They do the same i.e. open a listening VNC
port on port 5910. 

But imho the term vncdisplay is a bit vague. I realise 'display' refers
to a display port. However, I suspect that not everyone understands it
just means the tcp listening port. Perhaps it would be better to just
use the latter and deprecate/remove the vncdisplay line?
'vnclisten="0.0.0.0:10"' is more common anyway, right?

2) With upstream qemu it seems that the highest possible number for both
syntaxes is 99. In other words, it looks like upstream qemu 'suddenly'
enforces the VNC ports to be between 5900 and 5999.

It's just a matter of taste probably but I really dislike this new
restriction. I also dislike using iptables -t nat -j REDIRECT to
redirect another port number to the actual (59xx) VNC port. How do you
guys feel about this?

Oh, just a small disclaimer --  i'm not saying this should all be
settled before 4.2 though it's probably wise to at least state
somewhere that 'the vfb line is deprecated with xl'. And it's all up
to Ian c.s. anyway ;)

-- 
Stay in touch,
Mark van Dijk.                ,---------------------------------
-----------------------------'         Wed Sep 05 12:27 UTC 2012
Today is Pungenday, the 29th day of Bureaucracy in the YOLD 3178