lists  /  announce  owl-users  owl-dev  john-users  john-dev  passwdqc-users  yescrypt  popa3d-users  /  oss-security  kernel-hardening  musl  sabotage  tlsify  passwords  /  crypt-dev  xvendor  /  Bugtraq  Full-Disclosure  linux-kernel  linux-netdev  linux-ext4  linux-hardening  linux-cve-announce  PHC 
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.
[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date:	Thu, 07 Jun 2007 16:05:51 +0200
From:	Daniel Lezcano <>
To:	Pavel Emelianov <>
CC:	Daniel Lezcano <>,
	Patrick McHardy <>,
	Linux Containers <>,
	Linux Netdev List <>,
	"Eric W. Biederman" <>,
	Kirill Korotaev <>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Virtual ethernet tunnel

Pavel Emelianov wrote:
>>> I did this at the very first version, but Alexey showed me that this
>>> would be wrong. Look. When we create the second device it must be in
>>> the other namespace as it is useless to have them in one namespace.
>>> But if we have the device in the other namespace the RTNL_NEWLINK
>>> message from kernel would come into this namespace thus confusing ip
>>> utility in the init namespace. Creating the device in the init ns and
>>> moving it into the new one is rather a complex task.
>> Pavel,
>> moving the netdevice to another namespace is not a complex task. Eric
>> Biederman did it in its patchset ( cf. )
> By saying complex I didn't mean that this is difficult to implement,
> but that it consists (must consist) of many stages. I.e. composite.
> Making the device right in the namespace is liter.
>> When the pair device is created, both extremeties are into the init
>> namespace and you can choose to which namespace to move one extremity.
> I do not mind that.
>> When the network namespace dies, the netdev is moved back to the init
>> namespace.
>> That facilitate network device management.
>> Concerning netlink events, this is automatically generated when the
>> network device is moved through namespaces.
>> IMHO, we should have the network device movement between namespaces in
>> order to be able to move a physical network device too (eg. you have 4
>> NIC and you want to create 3 containers and assign 3 NIC to each of them)
> Agree. Moving the devices is a must-have functionality.
> I do not mind making the pair in the init namespace and move the second
> one into the desired namespace. But if we *always* will have two ends in
> different namespaces what to complicate things for?
Just to provide a netdev sufficiently generic to be used by people who 
don't want namespaces but just want to do some network testing, like Ben 
Greear does. He mentioned in a previous email, he will be happy to stop 
redirecting people to out of tree patch.

> Thanks,
> Pavel

To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at

Powered by blists - more mailing lists