From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: ebiederm@xmission.com (Eric W. Biederman) Subject: Re: [RFC] network namespaces Date: Wed, 06 Sep 2006 23:11:27 -0600 Message-ID: References: <54AD0F12E08D1541B826BE97C98F99F1963B59@NT-SJCA-0751.brcm.ad.broadcom.com> <20060906175312.7b4d0ddb@localhost.localdomain> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: "Caitlin Bestler" , "Kir Kolyshkin" , devel@openvz.org, "Andrey Savochkin" , alexey@sw.ru, "Linux Containers" , netdev@vger.kernel.org, sam@vilain.net Return-path: Received: from ebiederm.dsl.xmission.com ([166.70.28.69]:41891 "EHLO ebiederm.dsl.xmission.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750789AbWIGFM2 (ORCPT ); Thu, 7 Sep 2006 01:12:28 -0400 To: Stephen Hemminger In-Reply-To: <20060906175312.7b4d0ddb@localhost.localdomain> (Stephen Hemminger's message of "Wed, 6 Sep 2006 17:53:12 -0700") Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: netdev.vger.kernel.org Stephen Hemminger writes: > The problem with VNIC's is it won't work for all devices (without lots of > work), and for many device's it requires putting the device in promiscuous > mode. It also plays havoc with network access control devices. Which is fine. If it works it is a cool performance optimization. But it doesn't stop anything from my side if it doesn't. Eric