netdev - Re: Bridge: request for the via_phys

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

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-Id: <20100226.043028.245172342.davem@davemloft.net>
Date:	Fri, 26 Feb 2010 04:30:28 -0800 (PST)
From:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
To:	xemul@...nvz.org
Cc:	shemminger@...ux-foundation.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Bridge: request for the via_phys_dev feature discussion

From: Pavel Emelyanov <xemul@...nvz.org>
Date: Thu, 18 Feb 2010 15:21:12 +0300

> In simple situation containers users want to bridge their containers through
> veth device with the host eth0 adapter. But after one add his eth0 to bridge
> he need to
> a) reconfigure everything including IP addresses, routing tables and
>    netfilter rules
> b) recreate connections that were bound to eth0
> 
> That's OK if one setup the box from the scratch and adds eth0 to bridge from
> the very beginning, but for those who start using containers on pre-configured
> boxes or for those, who decided to switch to bridge+veth from some other 
> virtual device (e.g. macvlan or venet device in OpenVZ) this becomes real pain.
> 
> I don't insist you accept the patches Cyrill proposed, I don't even insist
> we rework them keeping the idea intact. I just want to know your opinion about
> how to solve the above problem better.

Stephen, please work with Pavel on finding a solution for this issue
that works for you.

Thanks.
--
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