On Mon, 2010-02-22 at 15:17 -0800, Eric W. Biederman wrote:

quoted text
> What I am thinking is:
> 
> "ip ns <name> route add blah" is:
> fd = open("/var/run/netns/<name>");
> sys_setns(fd);  /* Like unshare but takes an existing namespace */
> /* Then the rest of the existing ip command */

The other two below make some sense; For the above:
Does the point after sys_setns(fd) allow me to do io inside
ns <name>? Can i do open() and get a fd from ns <name>?

quoted text
> "ip ns list" is:
> dfd = open("/var/run/netns", O_DIRECTORY);
> getdents(dfd, buf, count);
> 
> "ip ns new <name>" is:
> unshare(CLONE_NEWNS);
> fd = nsfd(NETNS);
> mkdir("/var/run/netns/<name>");
> mount("none", "/var/run/netns/<name>", "ns", 0, fd);
> 
> Using unix domain names means that which namespaces you see is under
> control of userspace.  Which allows for nested containers (something I
> use today), and ultimately container migration.

The only problem that i see is events are not as nice. I take it i am 
going to get something like an inotify when a new namespace is created?

quoted text
> Using genetlink userspace doesn't result in a nestable implementation
> unless I introduce yet another namespace, ugh.

Is it not just a naming convention that you are dealing with?
Example in your scheme above a nested namespace shows up as:
/var/run/netns/<name>/<nestedname>, no?

cheers,
jamal

--
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