From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Kirill Korotaev Subject: Re: [patch -mm] net namespace: empty framework Date: Wed, 22 Nov 2006 16:23:05 +0300 Message-ID: <45644F39.20402@sw.ru> References: <4563007B.9010202@fr.ibm.com> <4563046B.6040909@sw.ru> <45633EDF.3050309@fr.ibm.com> <200611221121.59322.dim@openvz.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: Dmitry Mishin , Daniel Lezcano , Cedric Le Goater , Linux Kernel Mailing List , Andrew Morton , Herbert Poetzl , netdev@vger.kernel.org Return-path: Received: from mailhub.sw.ru ([195.214.233.200]:12929 "EHLO relay.sw.ru") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1755776AbWKVNOe (ORCPT ); Wed, 22 Nov 2006 08:14:34 -0500 To: "Eric W. Biederman" In-Reply-To: Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: netdev.vger.kernel.org >>>We will need this framework to move the network isolation code to the >>>ns_proxy/net_namespace structure. So if Cedric gives us a empty >>>framework it is fine, except if someone does not agree with it... >>> >>> -- Daniel. >> >>This patch looks acceptable for us. >>BTW, Daniel, we agreed to be based on the Andrey's patchset. I do not see a >>reason, why Cedric force us to make some unnecessary work and move existent >>patchset over his interface. > > > If you are going to take that attitude. Where was this conversation? > > It appears several relevant people were not aware of this development > discussion. So when it comes up for general review you can expect your > approach as well as your code to be critiqued. Eric, Dim collected the requirements for all the network virtualization approaches: http://wiki.openvz.org/Containers/Network_virtualization This was discussed with Daniel and Herbert. Dim and Daniel just wanted to prepare the patches for this. So I hope your critique will be constructive as they do a hard job :) Thanks, Kirill