From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: ebiederm@xmission.com (Eric W. Biederman) Subject: Re: Network virtualization/isolation Date: Mon, 04 Dec 2006 09:52:10 -0700 Message-ID: References: <453F8800.9070603@fr.ibm.com> <1165239894.3664.61.camel@localhost> <200612041900.42768.dim@openvz.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: hadi@cyberus.ca, Daniel Lezcano , devel@openvz.org, Linux Containers , Stephen Hemminger , netdev@vger.kernel.org Return-path: Received: from ebiederm.dsl.xmission.com ([166.70.28.69]:45294 "EHLO ebiederm.dsl.xmission.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S937135AbWLDQxV (ORCPT ); Mon, 4 Dec 2006 11:53:21 -0500 To: Dmitry Mishin In-Reply-To: <200612041900.42768.dim@openvz.org> (Dmitry Mishin's message of "Mon, 4 Dec 2006 19:00:42 +0300") Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: netdev.vger.kernel.org Dmitry Mishin writes: > On Monday 04 December 2006 18:35, Eric W. Biederman wrote: > [skip] >> Where and when you look to find the network namespace that applies to >> a packet is the primary difference between the OpenVZ L2 >> implementation and my L2 implementation. >> >> If there is a better and less intrusive while still being obvious >> method I am all for it. I do not like the OpenVZ thing of doing the >> lookup once and then stashing the value in current and the special >> casing the exceptions. > Why? I like it when things are obvious and not implied. The implementations seems to favor fewer lines of code touched over maintainability of the code. Which if you are maintaining out of tree code is fine. At leas that was my impression last time I looked at the code. I know there are a lot of silly things in the existing implementations because they were initially written without the expectation of being able to merge the code into the main kernel. This resulted in some non-general interfaces, and a preference for patches that touch as few lines of code as possible. Anyway this has bit has been discussed before and we can discuss it seriously in the context of patch review. Eric