Re: The issues for agreeing on a virtualization/namespaces implementation.

[Hubertus Franke <frankeh@watson.ibm.com>]

Serge E. Hallyn wrote:
> Quoting Hubertus Franke (frankeh@watson.ibm.com):
> 
>>IMHO, there is only a need to refer to a namespace from the global context.
>>Since one will be moving into a new container, but getting out of one
>>could be prohibitive (e.g. after migration)
>>It does not make sense therefore to know the name of a namespace in
>>a different container.
> 
> 
> Not sure I agree.  What if we are using a private namespace for a
> vserver, and then we want to create a private namespace in there for a
> mobile application.  Since we're talking about nested namespaces, this
> should be possible.
> 
> Now I believe Eric's code so far would make it so that you can only
> refer to a namespace from it's *creating* context.  Still restrictive,
> but seems acceptable.
> 

That's what I meant .. as usually used the wrong word..
s/global context/spawing context/g .. because that's the only
place where you have a pid to refer to the newly created container !

> (right?)
> 

Yes, seriii  .. ahmm serue
> -serge
>