"NetVM" -> "Networking" in VM Settings

[mfc]

use of the term "NetVM" in VM Settings > Basic for the settings of an AppVM is confusing because the "NetVM" could be a ProxyVM.

[andrewdavidwong]

I think it's actually a more general problem with the way the term "NetVM" is used in Qubes OS. It has at least two distinct meanings:

1. A type of VM which provides network access (usually directly to ProxyVMs and indirectly to AppVMs).
2. Whichever VM is directly connected to a VM for networking purposes (even if it's a ProxyVM!).

Imagine the following exchange:
A: "sys-firewall is this VM's NetVM."
B: "So sys-firewall is a NetVM?"
A: "No, it's a ProxyVM."
B: "But you just said that it's this VM's NetVM!"
A: "Well, yes, it's this VM's NetVM, but it's not itself a NetVM."
[B glares menacingly at A.]

(We've already made good progress on eliminating ambiguity here by changing netvm to sys-net.)

[andrewdavidwong]

I think it's actually a more general problem with the way the term "NetVM" is used in Qubes OS. It has at least two distinct meanings:

1. A type of VM which provides network access (usually directly to ProxyVMs and indirectly to AppVMs).
2. Whichever VM is directly connected to a VM for networking purposes (even if it's a ProxyVM!).

Imagine the following exchange:
A: "sys-firewall is this VM's NetVM."
B: "So sys-firewall is a NetVM?"
A: "No, it's a ProxyVM."
B: "But you just said that it's this VM's NetVM!"
A: "Well, yes, it's this VM's NetVM, but it's not itself a NetVM."
[B glares menacingly at A.]

(We've already made good progress on eliminating ambiguity here by changing netvm to sys-net.)

[andrewdavidwong]

BTW, I didn't mean to sound like I disagree with you, @mfc. I do agree with you. I just think that we would also have to disambiguate and decompose the term "NetVM" throughout Qubes OS (and the docs) to really fix this. It's not a big deal and not urgent, but it's something we should be aware of, I think.

[andrewdavidwong]

BTW, I didn't mean to sound like I disagree with you, @mfc. I do agree with you. I just think that we would also have to disambiguate and decompose the term "NetVM" throughout Qubes OS (and the docs) to really fix this. It's not a big deal and not urgent, but it's something we should be aware of, I think.

[mfc]

I agree with you so let's find those instances where it is the second case and disambiguate (like in this instance I proposed). if we can find them we can fix them :)

[mfc]

I agree with you so let's find those instances where it is the second case and disambiguate (like in this instance I proposed). if we can find them we can fix them :)

[Zrubi]

I would use the word 'router' or 'uplink' for the 2. case - instead of the current 'NetVM'

[Zrubi]

I would use the word 'router' or 'uplink' for the 2. case - instead of the current 'NetVM'

[marmarek]

I like 'uplink', or maybe even 'network uplink'? Any idea for one
word related to both 'network' and 'uplink'? Is 'uplink' clearly enough
related to network for average user?

@bnvk

Best Regards,
Marek Marczykowski-Górecki
Invisible Things Lab
A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text.
Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing?

[marmarek]

I like 'uplink', or maybe even 'network uplink'? Any idea for one
word related to both 'network' and 'uplink'? Is 'uplink' clearly enough
related to network for average user?

@bnvk

Best Regards,
Marek Marczykowski-Górecki
Invisible Things Lab
A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text.
Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing?

[mfc]

I don't think "uplink" is understood by average users unfortunately. The other categories in this settings page (VM Settings > Basic) are descriptive: "Name and Label", "Template". I feel like "Networking" is similarly descriptive. If it is selected as "none", the user knows "there is no networking for this qube", which feels more natural to say/understand than "there is no uplink for this qube".

[mfc]

I don't think "uplink" is understood by average users unfortunately. The other categories in this settings page (VM Settings > Basic) are descriptive: "Name and Label", "Template". I feel like "Networking" is similarly descriptive. If it is selected as "none", the user knows "there is no networking for this qube", which feels more natural to say/understand than "there is no uplink for this qube".

[marmarek]

On Thu, Feb 25, 2016 at 03:21:58AM -0800, Michael Carbone wrote:

I don't think "uplink" is understood by average users unfortunately. The other categories in this settings page (VM Settings > Basic) are descriptive: "Name and Label", "Template". I feel like "Networking" is similarly descriptive. If it is selected as "none", the user knows "there is no networking for this qube", which feels more natural to say/understand than "there is no uplink for this qube".

I think that may be good option in "VM setting" window. See what it
would look like:
Networking:

• network
• firewall
• tor
• usb
• none

Maybe worth explanation somewhere what is the difference between
"network" and "firewall". But generally looks good.

Best Regards,
Marek Marczykowski-Górecki
Invisible Things Lab
A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text.
Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing?

[marmarek]

On Thu, Feb 25, 2016 at 03:21:58AM -0800, Michael Carbone wrote:

I don't think "uplink" is understood by average users unfortunately. The other categories in this settings page (VM Settings > Basic) are descriptive: "Name and Label", "Template". I feel like "Networking" is similarly descriptive. If it is selected as "none", the user knows "there is no networking for this qube", which feels more natural to say/understand than "there is no uplink for this qube".

I think that may be good option in "VM setting" window. See what it
would look like:
Networking:

• network
• firewall
• tor
• usb
• none

Maybe worth explanation somewhere what is the difference between
"network" and "firewall". But generally looks good.

Best Regards,
Marek Marczykowski-Górecki
Invisible Things Lab
A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text.
Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing?

[bnvk]

Why is usb in this list? Seems like that should go under a different category like Devices to me. I added vpn in it's place, as that is a term + thing users are starting to understand / use to some degree!

Networking:

• network
• firewall
• tor
• vpn
• none

I've been thinking for awhile, GUI wise, we should separate out Networking away from the other VMs. I should finish some design comps to better explain this!

[bnvk]

Why is usb in this list? Seems like that should go under a different category like Devices to me. I added vpn in it's place, as that is a term + thing users are starting to understand / use to some degree!

Networking:

• network
• firewall
• tor
• vpn
• none

I've been thinking for awhile, GUI wise, we should separate out Networking away from the other VMs. I should finish some design comps to better explain this!

[marmarek]

On Thu, Feb 25, 2016 at 05:13:45AM -0800, Brennan Novak wrote:

Why is usb in this list? Seems like that should go under a different category like Devices to me.

Because USB VM is created as NetVM type. To be able to use USB network
devices (3G modems and such).

In 4.0 there will be no longer separate "NetVM type". There will be
"provides network" (switchable) property. So it should be much clearer
then.

Best Regards,
Marek Marczykowski-Górecki
Invisible Things Lab
A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text.
Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing?

[marmarek]

On Thu, Feb 25, 2016 at 05:13:45AM -0800, Brennan Novak wrote:

Why is usb in this list? Seems like that should go under a different category like Devices to me.

Because USB VM is created as NetVM type. To be able to use USB network
devices (3G modems and such).

In 4.0 there will be no longer separate "NetVM type". There will be
"provides network" (switchable) property. So it should be much clearer
then.

Best Regards,
Marek Marczykowski-Górecki
Invisible Things Lab
A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text.
Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing?

[mfc]

maybe have it be called usb-modem?

[mfc]

maybe have it be called usb-modem?

[marmarek]

On Thu, Feb 25, 2016 at 06:37:27AM -0800, Michael Carbone wrote:

maybe have it be called usb-modem?

That would be misleading even further. USB VM is where you have USB
controllers. Whatever is plugged in there.

Best Regards,
Marek Marczykowski-Górecki
Invisible Things Lab
A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text.
Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing?

[marmarek]

On Thu, Feb 25, 2016 at 06:37:27AM -0800, Michael Carbone wrote:

maybe have it be called usb-modem?

That would be misleading even further. USB VM is where you have USB
controllers. Whatever is plugged in there.

Best Regards,
Marek Marczykowski-Górecki
Invisible Things Lab
A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text.
Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing?

[andrewdavidwong]

I like 'uplink', or maybe even 'network uplink'? Any idea for one word related to both 'network' and 'uplink'? Is 'uplink' clearly enough related to network for average user?

Maybe "connection"?

[andrewdavidwong]

I like 'uplink', or maybe even 'network uplink'? Any idea for one word related to both 'network' and 'uplink'? Is 'uplink' clearly enough related to network for average user?

Maybe "connection"?

[mfc]

"connection", "networking", "network connection", all are fine. any are disambiguous compared to "NetVM".

[mfc]

"connection", "networking", "network connection", all are fine. any are disambiguous compared to "NetVM".

[tasket]

I think 'uplink' is best because it will stick no matter how novice or technical the howto or conversation is. In the technical case, you are now having to distinguish between eth0, vif_, tun_, etc. You can use terms like 'uplink', 'downlink' or 'downstream' together without the confusion that 'connection' would bring.

We have to think about whether these terms retain their meaning when writing instructions for users of different technical ability.

[tasket]

I think 'uplink' is best because it will stick no matter how novice or technical the howto or conversation is. In the technical case, you are now having to distinguish between eth0, vif_, tun_, etc. You can use terms like 'uplink', 'downlink' or 'downstream' together without the confusion that 'connection' would bring.

We have to think about whether these terms retain their meaning when writing instructions for users of different technical ability.

[marmarek]

See #1763 (comment)

[marmarek]

See #1763 (comment)

[tasket]

If terms like 'uplink' and 'downlink' are unpalatable (though it seems like they are descriptive enough to give users the right idea) then I'd suggest borrowing terminology of common consumer routers, which are things that people have to deal with already. This is apt because service VMs are virtual routers. They often call the uplink ports "WAN" or "Internet".

[tasket]

If terms like 'uplink' and 'downlink' are unpalatable (though it seems like they are descriptive enough to give users the right idea) then I'd suggest borrowing terminology of common consumer routers, which are things that people have to deal with already. This is apt because service VMs are virtual routers. They often call the uplink ports "WAN" or "Internet".

[qubesos-bot]

Automated announcement from builder-github

The package qubes-manager-4.0.5-1.fc25 has been pushed to the r4.0 testing repository for dom0.
To test this update, please install it with the following command:

sudo qubes-dom0-update --enablerepo=qubes-dom0-current-testing

Changes included in this update

[qubesos-bot]

Automated announcement from builder-github

The package qubes-manager-4.0.5-1.fc25 has been pushed to the r4.0 testing repository for dom0.
To test this update, please install it with the following command:

sudo qubes-dom0-update --enablerepo=qubes-dom0-current-testing

Changes included in this update

[qubesos-bot]

Automated announcement from builder-github

The package qubes-manager-4.0.8-1.fc25 has been pushed to the r4.0 stable repository for dom0.
To install this update, please use the standard update command:

sudo qubes-dom0-update

Or update dom0 via Qubes Manager.

Changes included in this update

[qubesos-bot]

Automated announcement from builder-github

The package qubes-manager-4.0.8-1.fc25 has been pushed to the r4.0 stable repository for dom0.
To install this update, please use the standard update command:

sudo qubes-dom0-update

Or update dom0 via Qubes Manager.

Changes included in this update