From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S932334Ab0IXORe (ORCPT ); Fri, 24 Sep 2010 10:17:34 -0400 Received: from mail-fx0-f46.google.com ([209.85.161.46]:47580 "EHLO mail-fx0-f46.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753168Ab0IXORc (ORCPT ); Fri, 24 Sep 2010 10:17:32 -0400 DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=sender:subject:from:reply-to:to:cc:in-reply-to:references :content-type:date:message-id:mime-version:x-mailer :content-transfer-encoding; b=UKEVvq7pspBATWyi2oFOo3bF+/WxciMrtPwKtrZBJcLEgoogwhoOL1YwM2Mzpy75tB XQff+lD5GMiW7wX1cMyMGYNwRzqJQ1kHkAT+AWD7ne5YjJDAjVjkji2TDwTQe6OhsqTl ibM8JDc/Oiyn3K8S1tJKd6fAXh99CebusKbmg= Subject: Re: [PATCH 7/8] net: Allow setting the network namespace by fd From: jamal Reply-To: hadi@cyberus.ca To: David Lamparter Cc: "Eric W. Biederman" , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Linux Containers , netdev@vger.kernel.org, netfilter-devel@vger.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org In-Reply-To: <20100924140943.GB1551619@jupiter.n2.diac24.net> References: <1285240926.5036.7.camel@bigi> <20100923145856.GB1160234@jupiter.n2.diac24.net> <1285329084.13976.661.camel@bigi> <20100924125704.GA1551619@jupiter.n2.diac24.net> <1285335173.13976.693.camel@bigi> <20100924140943.GB1551619@jupiter.n2.diac24.net> Content-Type: text/plain Date: Fri, 24 Sep 2010 10:16:58 -0400 Message-Id: <1285337818.13976.697.camel@bigi> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.26.1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Fri, 2010-09-24 at 16:09 +0200, David Lamparter wrote: > I understood your point. What I'm saying is that that functional graph > you're describing is too simplistic do be a workable model. Your graph > allows for what you're trying to do, yes. But your graph is not modeling > the reality. How about we put this specific point to rest by agreeing to disagree? ;-> > Err... I'm migrating netdevs to assign them to namespaces to allow them > to use them? Setup, basically. Either way a device move only happens as > result of some administrative action; be it creating a new namespace or > changing the physical/logical network setup. > Ok, different need. You have a much more basic requirement than i do. > wtf is a "remote" namespace? > A namespace that is remotely located on another machine/hardware ;-> > Can you please describe your application that requires moving possibly > several network devices together with "their" routes to a different > namespace? scaling and availability are the driving requirements. cheers, jamal