That's not how people typically use "proprietary" when referring to open-source code
Indeed, many people believe that source code being available somehow magically makes things non-proprietary. Not sure where that belief came from. An API is proprietary when it 1. Doesn't comply with existing standards, 2. Isn't interoperable, and 3. Is controlled by a single entity.
multiple vendors
It comes from IBM/RedHat - a single commercial entity, not “thousands of independent contributors”. But yes, if it was a proper community project then it of course wouldn’t be proprietary.
twice the throughput
Compared to NBD which can’t use RDMA at all. Again: the idea is old and not bad, it’s just that this particular implementation looks like another case of NIH.
Comments
Indeed, many people believe that source code being available somehow magically makes things non-proprietary. Not sure where that belief came from. An API is proprietary when it 1. Doesn't comply with existing standards, 2. Isn't interoperable, and 3. Is controlled by a single entity.
It comes from IBM/RedHat - a single commercial entity, not “thousands of independent contributors”. But yes, if it was a proper community project then it of course wouldn’t be proprietary.
Compared to NBD which can’t use RDMA at all. Again: the idea is old and not bad, it’s just that this particular implementation looks like another case of NIH.