From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: chris-SqNQQPNds68nxqbYAscKCQ@public.gmane.org Subject: Re: Net containers config and usage Date: Thu, 15 Jan 2009 13:59:00 -0800 Message-ID: <20090115215900.GA30607@versecorp.net> References: <20090113191837.GA29900@versecorp.net> <496CF11A.7090908@free.fr> <20090113214747.GA23742@versecorp.net> <1231887220.6398.73.camel@groeck-laptop> <496DA755.1040001@free.fr> <20090114172739.GA13581@versecorp.net> <496E23DA.9080402@free.fr> <20090114192633.GA8572@us.ibm.com> <20090114193944.GA14129@versecorp.net> <496E42D6.2080306@free.fr> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <496E42D6.2080306-GANU6spQydw@public.gmane.org> List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: containers-bounces-cunTk1MwBs9QetFLy7KEm3xJsTq8ys+cHZ5vskTnxNA@public.gmane.org Errors-To: containers-bounces-cunTk1MwBs9QetFLy7KEm3xJsTq8ys+cHZ5vskTnxNA@public.gmane.org To: Daniel Lezcano Cc: "containers-qjLDD68F18O7TbgM5vRIOg@public.gmane.org" , "Eric W. Biederman" List-Id: containers.vger.kernel.org > > > >Yes, ultimately we'll need the physical device inside the same namespace > >as our application. Our application does a lot of management on the > >interface, > >monitoring things like the interface's link-pulse and such, and that > >wouldn't > >be available through a virtual interface. We can always redesign things > >to have the management portion run in the namespace with the physical > >interface, > >but for performance reasons we'd eventually want the physical interface to > >be > >directly inside the namespace anyway - so that would probably be wasted > >effort. > > > Did you tried with the macvlan ? I just tried it - and it does work - I can move the vlan interfaces into the namespace. But that's not a solution for us - we really need to support communications out to other nodes on the network that we can't count on using vlan. Thanks, Chris