OpenVZ Forum


Home » Mailing lists » Devel » Re: [patch 2/6] [Network namespace] Network device sharing by view
Re: strict isolation of net interfaces [message #4235 is a reply to message #4151] Mon, 03 July 2006 14:53 Go to previous messageGo to previous message
Andrey Savochkin is currently offline  Andrey Savochkin
Messages: 47
Registered: December 2005
Member
Sam, Serge, Cedric,

On Fri, Jun 30, 2006 at 02:49:05PM +1200, Sam Vilain wrote:
> Serge E. Hallyn wrote:
> > The last one in your diagram confuses me - why foo0:1? I would
> > have thought it'd be
> >
> > host | guest 0 | guest 1 | guest2
> > ----------------------+-----------+-----------+------------- -
> > | | | |
> > |-> l0 <-------+-> lo0 ... | lo0 | lo0
> > | | | |
> > |-> eth0 | | |
> > | | | |
> > |-> veth0 <--------+-> eth0 | |
> > | | | |
> > |-> veth1 <--------+-----------+-----------+-> eth0
> > | | | |
> > |-> veth2 <-------+-----------+-> eth0 |
> >
> > [...]
> >
> > So conceptually using a full virtual net device per container
> > certainly seems cleaner to me, and it seems like it should be
> > simpler by way of statistics gathering etc, but are there actually
> > any real gains? Or is the support for multiple IPs per device
> > actually enough?
> >
>
> Why special case loopback?
>
> Why not:
>
> host | guest 0 | guest 1 | guest2
> ----------------------+-----------+-----------+------------- -
> | | | |
> |-> lo | | |
> | | | |
> |-> vlo0 <---------+-> lo | |
> | | | |
> |-> vlo1 <---------+-----------+-----------+-> lo
> | | | |
> |-> vlo2 <--------+-----------+-> lo |
> | | | |
> |-> eth0 | | |
> | | | |
> |-> veth0 <--------+-> eth0 | |
> | | | |
> |-> veth1 <--------+-----------+-----------+-> eth0
> | | | |
> |-> veth2 <-------+-----------+-> eth0 |

I still can't completely understand your direction of thoughts.
Could you elaborate on IP address assignment in your diagram, please? For
example, guest0 wants 127.0.0.1 and 192.168.0.1 addresses on its lo
interface, and 10.1.1.1 on its eth0 interface.
Does this diagram assume any local IP addresses on v* interfaces in the
"host"?

And the second question.
Are vlo0, veth0, etc. devices supposed to have hard_xmit routines?

Best regards

Andrey
 
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Previous Topic: Re: [Vserver] Re: Container Test Campaign
Next Topic: porting stable patch to higher kernel versions
Goto Forum:
  


Current Time: Sat Aug 02 16:29:22 GMT 2025

Total time taken to generate the page: 0.54990 seconds