On Sunday 03 December 2006 19:00, Eric W. Biederman wrote:

Ok.  Just a quick summary of where I see the discussion.

We all agree that L2 isolation is needed at some point.

As we all agreed on this, may be it is time to send patches one-by-one?
For the beggining, I propose to resend Cedric's empty namespace patch as base 
for others - it is really empty, but necessary in order to move further.

After this patch and the following net namespace unshare patch will be 
accepted, I could send network devices virtualization patches for review and 
discussion.

What do you think?

The approaches discussed for L2 and L3 are sufficiently orthogonal
that we can implement then in either order.  You would need to
unshare L3 to unshare L2, but if we think of them as two separate
namespaces we are likely to be in better shape.

The L3 discussion still has the problem that there has not been
agreement on all of the semantics yet.

More comments after I get some sleep.

Eric
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

-- 
Thanks,
Dmitry.