Hi Leandro,
Are you talking about implementing the Spice protocol client in the coreboot? Does it rely on QEMU? I think the scenario you are talking about, or Spice protocol itself, it quite similar to RDP (Remote Desktop Protocol) protocol, isn't it? In the typical client-server model, for example, a Network Computer (with limited hardware resource) running a tiny Linux allows you to "rdesktop" to any server supporting RDP protocol. Maybe you need to think of a more appealing scenario. :)
Best Regards, Hao Li Peking University
--------------------------------------------------- Date: Tue, 22 Mar 2011 14:50:59 -0400 From: Leandro Dorileo ldorileo@gmail.com To: Marc Jones marcj303@gmail.com Cc: Coreboot coreboot@coreboot.org Subject: Re: [coreboot] [GSoC] Coreboot Spice Payload Message-ID: AANLkTimkw=ArXZ8-qiZAHzT6qwSxCCup3-0X+-GNR0tJ@mail.gmail.com Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Hi Marc
On Tue, Mar 22, 2011 at 11:26 AM, Marc Jones marcj303@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, Mar 21, 2011 at 11:49 AM, Leandro Dorileo ldorileo@gmail.com
wrote:
Hi Guys!
I saw coreboot was accepted as mentoring organization for GSoC this year once again. I want to participate this year again as student and I came with the idea of a Coreboot Spice Payload. I wrote a small text[1] describing the idea.
I would like to hear from you what you think. I have discussed with some guys already but would like to open it a bit more.
[1] - http://vps.dorilex.net/~dorileo/coreboot-spice-payload.txt
Thanks....
-- Leandro Dorileo
Hi Leandro,
Yes, coreboot is accepting student applications for GSoC again this year. Your idea looks very interesting. I think that expanding the payload offerings for coreboot and developing with libpayload would make a good project. Have you thought about what kind of hardware you would develop on?
All I need is something with a ethernet, video, serial and keyboard devices - no special requirements on that. I own a coreboot supported mainboard - the one I used in 2009. But I`m considering to buy an allix.* + flexyice - I haven`t decided yet, can you suggest anything?
Who uses Spice today?
Spice is mainly supported by RedHat, it was developed by Qumranet who used originally supported spice on their desktop virtualization product named SolidIce. Now RedHat has implemented spice on open source products like qemu to support server side and their enterprise desktop clients.
What type of systems or users would take advantage of a Spice Payload?
Once we`re talking about remote desktop virtualization anyone who wants do shrink the expenses with hardware and hardware upgrades on desktops. The real operating system runs in the server which off loads the heavy CPU tasks, you can have a small and cheap piece of hardware capable of running any modern and powerful desktop operating system.
Hi Hao
On Wed, Mar 23, 2011 at 3:37 AM, Hao Li lihao@mprc.pku.edu.cn wrote:
Hi Leandro,
Are you talking about implementing the Spice protocol client in the coreboot?
Yes, correct. I`m talking about implementing the Spice protocol - with that, surely I mean the client piece.
Does it rely on QEMU?
Not exactly the client but QEMU is a vital component of the architecture, it`s the user mode component for kvm hipervisor. I mentioned QEMU to show the virtualization stack is already capable of running spice "aware" clients.
I think the scenario you are talking about, or Spice protocol itself, it quite similar to RDP (Remote Desktop Protocol) protocol, isn't it?
Maybe on the remote nature, but I`m sure it differs a lot on some other aspects. RDP is purely a remote rendering protocol and Spice is a remote virtual desktop one. Spice includes in the architecture optimizations for virtualized operating systems which is the reason for the specified VDI layer.
In the typical client-server model, for example, a Network Computer (with limited hardware resource) running a tiny Linux allows you to "rdesktop" to any server supporting RDP protocol.
Well, this is not a typical client-server model. It includes components not necessarily present in the "typical" remote desktop scenario. We`re running an operating system in a virtualized environment with its capabilities and specific features, the client for example doesn`t connect directly to the guest operating system but a middle ware.
Maybe you need to think of a more appealing scenario. :)
If we see a simple client running in a "proper" operating system we realize that even using the spice protocol we can have rich clients(and we do) it`s just a matter of protocol it may be RDP, Spice or any other, but we still need a full OS running in the client side, if we have all our heavy CPU tasks running in another computer why a full operating system running?
When I say we can run a desktop in a cheap piece of hardware I mean "really poor piece of hardware" things that wouldn`t be capable of running a MS Windows, Mac OS X, Linux, whatever it is.
You can still ask yourself, why some one would need something like this? well, some companies may save a lot of money with that. I see it as an interesting option, eliminating many dollar that would be invested in hundreds or thousands of desktop computers - it`s just a matter of option. :-)
Thank you for your questions. Best regards.
Hi Leandro,
I think a simple picture describing your idea would definitely help people understand the benefit of integrating Spice into coreboot. I am not saying Spice should not be integrated into coreboot, since the coreboot's payload mechanism allows you to integrate whatever applications you want to.
BTW, I am still confused about your description on "really poor piece of hardware". What piece of hardware are you referring to? If the hardware is so poor, then how could that hardware support Spice? Even the RDP, a remote rendering protocol as your saying, requires hardware with at least several hundreds of MHZ frequency if you want to have a comfortable experience. But I think this is ok since even current mobile internet devices are capable of running complex software stacks.
Best, - Hao Li
-----Original Message----- From: Leandro Dorileo [mailto:ldorileo@gmail.com] Sent: Wednesday, March 23, 2011 9:41 PM To: Hao Li Cc: coreboot@coreboot.org; marcj303@gmail.com Subject: Re: Re: [coreboot] [GSoC] Coreboot Spice Payload
Hi Hao
On Wed, Mar 23, 2011 at 3:37 AM, Hao Li lihao@mprc.pku.edu.cn wrote:
Hi Leandro,
Are you talking about implementing the Spice protocol client in the coreboot?
Yes, correct. I`m talking about implementing the Spice protocol - with that, surely I mean the client piece.
Does it rely on QEMU?
Not exactly the client but QEMU is a vital component of the architecture, it`s the user mode component for kvm hipervisor. I mentioned QEMU to show the virtualization stack is already capable of running spice "aware" clients.
I think the scenario you are talking about, or Spice protocol itself, it quite similar to RDP (Remote Desktop Protocol) protocol, isn't it?
Maybe on the remote nature, but I`m sure it differs a lot on some other aspects. RDP is purely a remote rendering protocol and Spice is a remote virtual desktop one. Spice includes in the architecture optimizations for virtualized operating systems which is the reason for the specified VDI layer.
In the typical client-server model, for example, a Network Computer (with limited hardware resource) running a tiny Linux allows you to "rdesktop" to any server supporting RDP protocol.
Well, this is not a typical client-server model. It includes components not necessarily present in the "typical" remote desktop scenario. We`re running an operating system in a virtualized environment with its capabilities and specific features, the client for example doesn`t connect directly to the guest operating system but a middle ware.
Maybe you need to think of a more appealing scenario. :)
If we see a simple client running in a "proper" operating system we realize that even using the spice protocol we can have rich clients(and we do) it`s just a matter of protocol it may be RDP, Spice or any other, but we still need a full OS running in the client side, if we have all our heavy CPU tasks running in another computer why a full operating system running?
When I say we can run a desktop in a cheap piece of hardware I mean "really poor piece of hardware" things that wouldn`t be capable of running a MS Windows, Mac OS X, Linux, whatever it is.
You can still ask yourself, why some one would need something like this? well, some companies may save a lot of money with that. I see it as an interesting option, eliminating many dollar that would be invested in hundreds or thousands of desktop computers - it`s just a matter of option. :-)
Thank you for your questions. Best regards.
Hi Hao
On Wed, Mar 23, 2011 at 11:28 AM, Hao Li lihao@mprc.pku.edu.cn wrote:
Hi Leandro,
I think a simple picture describing your idea would definitely help people understand the benefit of integrating Spice into coreboot. I am not saying Spice should not be integrated into coreboot, since the coreboot's payload mechanism allows you to integrate whatever applications you want to.
Ok, no problem. I understand your questions constructively. I have mentioned in another email that I`m improving/writing the original text I posted in the first email.
BTW, I am still confused about your description on "really poor piece of hardware". What piece of hardware are you referring to? If the hardware is so poor, then how could that hardware support Spice? Even the RDP, a remote rendering protocol as your saying, requires hardware with at least several hundreds of MHZ frequency if you want to have a comfortable experience. But I think this is ok since even current mobile internet devices are capable of running complex software stacks.
By "really poor piece of hardware" I mean the minimal, i.e. a board only with ethernet, vga and serial, no storage, low memory and processor.
Regards...
-
Hao Li -
Leandro Dorileo