[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20180309140840.324bf341@redhat.com>
Date: Fri, 9 Mar 2018 14:08:40 +0100
From: Jiri Benc <jbenc@...hat.com>
To: Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>
Cc: "David S . Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next] net: do not create fallback tunnels for
non-default namespaces
On Fri, 9 Mar 2018 04:53:07 -0800, Eric Dumazet wrote:
> Unless you bring it up ;)
Often, you need some options to be specified, thus you end up creating
another interface anyway.
> Compatibility problems, mostly.
> Some users might depend on existing behavior.
How is this a compatibility problem, when the user has to opt in?
Without the default value, the kernel behaves as before. I'm sorry,
I don't see the problem, what am I missing?
> You and me would not care of breaking our setups, but maybe not
> unaware people out there.
Sure, that's why this is an option and it defaults to off.
> Since init_ns is created at boot time before the sysctl can be
> changed, we rather should not change the default behavior for init_ns.
This could be a problem for built in drivers. With modules, I'm
perfectly happy doing this in initrd :-)
To behave consistently in all cases, we might consider adding a boot
option for this, too, though.
Jiri
Powered by blists - more mailing lists