From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: "Luis R. Rodriguez" Subject: Re: wireless vs. network namespaces (part II) Date: Mon, 29 Sep 2008 12:03:45 -0700 Message-ID: <20080929190345.GD6203@tesla> References: <1222509685.3798.59.camel@johannes.berg> <1222587651.3798.72.camel@johannes.berg> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Cc: "Eric W. Biederman" , linux-wireless , netdev , Jouni Malinen To: Johannes Berg Return-path: Received: from mail.atheros.com ([12.36.123.2]:64437 "EHLO mail.atheros.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751337AbYI2TD4 (ORCPT ); Mon, 29 Sep 2008 15:03:56 -0400 Received: from mail.atheros.com ([10.10.20.105]) by sidewinder.atheros.com for ; Mon, 29 Sep 2008 12:03:56 -0700 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1222587651.3798.72.camel@johannes.berg> Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Sun, Sep 28, 2008 at 12:40:51AM -0700, Johannes Berg wrote: > On Sat, 2008-09-27 at 18:39 -0700, Eric W. Biederman wrote: > > In the wired ethernet world there is a lot of value in moving just > > a vlan interface or just one mac address with mac vlan into a network > > namespace. Allowing full speed access to the hardware that can do > > just about anything while functionally restricting what user space > > can do with the hardware. > > Right, except that wireless really is different in that for one you > can't really usefully have multiple virtual interfaces unless you're > making an AP Well it may be possible later in STA too, but that is just me looking at a crystal ball. > (and I think it's unlikely you'd want that in an AP, and > even if I'm not willing to support it, You mean AP VLANs? I thought you added that code already. I don't follow. Luis