Re: My planned work on networking stack (vimage)

James Read wrote:
> 
> > I still have in mind that I would like to see vimage[1] in HEAD one day
> > ... I think it would be a pretty cool feature to have. If one can keep
> > this in mind when doing greater modelling on the network stack it
> > might help the one who will - at some time - find the time to
> > ingtegrate it.
> >
> >
> > [1] http://www.tel.fer.hr/zec/BSD/vimage/index.html
> >
> 
> </Off Topic>
> 
> In my opinion, this would be a _VERY_ good 'feature' to add into the system.
> As it stands there is minimal 'networking' in a jail from a users point of
> view, and also an administrators view aswell (granted this isnt exactly what
> jail was designed to do, and so on). This could be more then an asset to the
> whole jail architecture, by providing a clone-able network stack within
> jails. For instance, you could then run programs/services like NFS etc from
> jail to jail without having to lock down services offered from the jail
> 'host'.

Having a per-jail NFS is not dependend on a dedicated network stack but
other things.  NFS only uses the network for transport, there is on need
to have it separated.

> If this can in _any way_ be pushed/implemented (with minimal distruption) so
> that is it in HEAD/CURRENT then its well on the way to complementing what
> 'jail' does.

The patch set is pretty extensive and intrusive and only for 4.x.  Adding
locking for 5.x would be a pretty nice challenge as well and not easy to
get right for all cases.

> This is one thing that I would like to use, without patching systems. But
> then thats just my 'wish list' opinion of it.

I think is makes more sense to get something like userland BSD.

-- 
Andre