From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Alan Cox <alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] BSD Jail LSM (2/3)
Date: Mon, 13 Sep 2004 11:56:39 +0100
Sender: netdev-bounce@oss.sgi.com
Message-ID: <1095072996.14355.12.camel@localhost.localdomain>
References: <1094847705.2188.94.camel@serge.austin.ibm.com>
	 <1094847787.2188.101.camel@serge.austin.ibm.com>
	 <1094844708.18107.5.camel@localhost.localdomain>
	 <20040912233342.GA12097@escher.cs.wm.edu>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Cc: Chris Wright <chrisw@osdl.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        akpm@osdl.org, netdev@oss.sgi.com
Return-path: <netdev-bounce@oss.sgi.com>
To: "Serge E. Hallyn" <serue@us.ibm.com>
In-Reply-To: <20040912233342.GA12097@escher.cs.wm.edu>
Errors-to: netdev-bounce@oss.sgi.com
List-Id: netdev.vger.kernel.org

On Llu, 2004-09-13 at 00:33, Serge E. Hallyn wrote:
> Right now one must choose between either an ipv4 or ipv6 interface.
> Is typical ipv6 usage such that it would be preferable to be able to
> specify one of each?  

Its normal to have both yes.

A more interesting question is whether all of the "which socket for
which use" stuff could be addressed by netfilter chains run at
bind/connect time ?