From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: ebiederm-aS9lmoZGLiVWk0Htik3J/w@public.gmane.org (Eric W. Biederman) Subject: Re: Net containers config and usage Date: Thu, 15 Jan 2009 20:38:23 -0800 Message-ID: References: <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> <20090115215900.GA30607@versecorp.net> <496FB6F7.9080906@free.fr> <20090115232013.GA9722@versecorp.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <20090115232013.GA9722-SqNQQPNds68nxqbYAscKCQ@public.gmane.org> (Chris R. Jones's message of "Thu, 15 Jan 2009 15:20:13 -0800") 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: "Chris R. Jones" Cc: "containers-qjLDD68F18O7TbgM5vRIOg@public.gmane.org" List-Id: containers.vger.kernel.org "Chris R. Jones" writes: > On Thu, Jan 15, 2009 at 11:21:43PM +0100, Daniel Lezcano wrote: >> chris-SqNQQPNds68nxqbYAscKCQ@public.gmane.org wrote: >> >>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. >> > >> Perhaps I am misunderstand but the macvlan is just an "eth aliased" >> interface, so you should but able to communicate with the outside world >> and keep the same performances as the physical device, no ? The only >> drawback with the macvlan is you can not communicate on the same host >> between different namespaces. And that drawback (when all the macvlan are off of the same network device is actually a bug). >We did some benchmark last year wih the >> macvlan and we got very good results. > > Oh great, I confused the macvlan support with 802.1q vlan interfaces > (as added through vconfig). macvlan does look very promising - I was able > to create a macvlan interface and assign it to my namespace - looks pretty good! Good to hear you have a solution. Putting physical hardware devices in network namespaces is definitely on the todo. But it looks to be a while before we get all of the details sorted out. Eric