Tejun Heo <htejun@gmail.com> writes:

> Hello,
>
> Okay, some questions.
>
> * What do you think about not allowing duplicate names across different
> tags?  ie. there's only one ethX anywhere but it's visible only in a
> specific namespace (and maybe in the default global one).  Or does
> everyone need its own eth0.  If this is acceptable, the problem becomes
> _much_ simpler.

I agree, and unfortunately this is the problem I am really trying to solve.
Everyone namespace has it's own loopback interface.

> * I think we can do away with the magic tag and use a pointer to
> vfsmount instead.  So, a process which wants to be in certain namespace
> can bind-mount /sysfs to its own /sysfs and make needed sysfs nodes
> bound to the mount.  Does this sound okay?  Such process should probably
> be in its own chrooted environment to function properly.

That would actually be preferable.

> * I haven't really followed the containers thread.  Do people generally
> agree on including it in mainline when we have all the fancy
> virtualization stuff?

Generally.  Assuming all of the i's are dotted and all of the t's crossed.

Eric
_______________________________________________
Containers mailing list
Containers@lists.linux-foundation.org
https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/containers