From: Patrick McHardy <kaber@trash.net>
To: Vivien Chappelier <vivien.chappelier@thomson.net>
Cc: netdev <netdev@vger.kernel.org>,
David Miller <davem@davemloft.net>,
Benjamin Thery <benjamin.thery@bull.net>,
jleu@mindspring.com, linux-vrf-general@lists.sourceforge.net
Subject: Re: [PATCH 6/6] netns: configurable number of initial network namespaces
Date: Tue, 28 Oct 2008 19:21:54 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <49075842.6000901@trash.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <49075488.8030002@thomson.net>
Vivien Chappelier wrote:
> Yes; the linux-vrf patches had a new netlink message to create/remove
> the equivalent of a network namespace (ip vrf add 1). I've not ported
> this feature yet, so this patch is meant to provide another way of
> setting up networking stacks without the need for a new process for each
> stack. The ability to dynamically create/remove networking stacks from
> userspace would definitely be useful.
I see, I didn't realize the process that created a namespace
needs to be kept running. So yes, creating standalone network
namespaces seems to make sense.
> There are also some very minor advantages in creating the namespaces
> statically at boot time, such as increasing the chances that the
> allocation works (though network namespaces are quite small), and
> improving boot time by avoiding a few calls to /sbin/ip on startup.
> Since we are running on embedded devices, that is something that matter
> to us, but it may not be enough to justify the need for this feature.
> Anyway, I do not think it hurts to have the ability to create static
> networking stacks at boot time.
I don't have an opinion on this. Thanks for the explanation.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2008-10-28 18:21 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2008-10-28 17:46 [PATCH 6/6] netns: configurable number of initial network namespaces Vivien Chappelier
2008-10-28 17:51 ` Patrick McHardy
2008-10-28 18:06 ` Vivien Chappelier
2008-10-28 18:21 ` Patrick McHardy [this message]
2008-10-30 22:41 ` Eric W. Biederman
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2008-10-30 13:11 Vivien Chappelier
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=49075842.6000901@trash.net \
--to=kaber@trash.net \
--cc=benjamin.thery@bull.net \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=jleu@mindspring.com \
--cc=linux-vrf-general@lists.sourceforge.net \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=vivien.chappelier@thomson.net \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.