[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <467D9B8F.2050403@garzik.org>
Date: Sat, 23 Jun 2007 18:15:43 -0400
From: Jeff Garzik <jeff@...zik.org>
To: David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
CC: ebiederm@...ssion.com, kaber@...sh.net, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
hadi@...erus.ca, shemminger@...ux-foundation.org,
greearb@...delatech.com, yoshfuji@...ux-ipv6.org,
containers@...ts.osdl.org,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: [RFD] L2 Network namespace infrastructure
David Miller wrote:
> I don't accept that we have to add another function argument
> to a bunch of core routines just to support this crap,
> especially since you give no way to turn it off and get
> that function argument slot back.
>
> To be honest I think this form of virtualization is a complete
> waste of time, even the openvz approach.
>
> We're protecting the kernel from itself, and that's an endless
> uphill battle that you will never win. Let's do this kind of
> stuff properly with a real minimal hypervisor, hopefully with
> appropriate hardware level support and good virtualized device
> interfaces, instead of this namespace stuff.
Strongly seconded. This containerized virtualization approach just
bloats up the kernel for something that is inherently fragile and IMO
less secure -- protecting the kernel from itself.
Plenty of other virt approaches don't stir the code like this, while
simultaneously providing fewer, more-clean entry points for the
virtualization to occur.
And that's speaking WITHOUT my vendor hat on...
Jeff
-
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