lists.openwall.net | 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
| ||
|
Message-ID: <466810BF.2090704@fr.ibm.com> Date: Thu, 07 Jun 2007 16:05:51 +0200 From: Daniel Lezcano <dlezcano@...ibm.com> To: Pavel Emelianov <xemul@...nvz.org> CC: Daniel Lezcano <dlezcano@...ibm.com>, Patrick McHardy <kaber@...sh.net>, Linux Containers <containers@...ts.osdl.org>, Linux Netdev List <netdev@...r.kernel.org>, "Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@...ssion.com>, Kirill Korotaev <dev@...nvz.org> 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. http://lxc.sf.net/network ) >> > > 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. https://lists.linux-foundation.org/pipermail/containers/2007-April/004420.html > Thanks, > Pavel > > - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Powered by blists - more mailing lists