From owner-freebsd-hackers Tue Nov 9 19:38:41 1999 Delivered-To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Received: from orange.kame.net (orange.kame.net [203.178.141.194]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 127541515E for ; Tue, 9 Nov 1999 19:38:21 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from shin@nd.net.fujitsu.co.jp) Received: from localhost (kame213.kame.net [203.178.141.213]) by orange.kame.net (8.9.1+3.1W/3.7W) with ESMTP id MAA06750; Wed, 10 Nov 1999 12:37:41 +0900 (JST) To: dot@dotat.at Cc: hackers@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Should jail treat ip-number? In-Reply-To: References: <22398.942136151@critter.freebsd.dk> <19991110022852N.shin@nd.net.fujitsu.co.jp> X-Mailer: Mew version 1.94 on Emacs 20.4 / Mule 4.0 (HANANOEN) X-Prom-Mew: Prom-Mew 1.93.4 (procmail reader for Mew) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <19991110123829Z.shin@nd.net.fujitsu.co.jp> Date: Wed, 10 Nov 1999 12:38:29 +0900 From: Yoshinobu Inoue X-Dispatcher: imput version 990905(IM130) Lines: 23 Sender: owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG > > Then IPv6 support for jail should be very good thing, > > because extremely many IP addresses become available for > > a machine with IPv6. (which is not with IPv4) > > We have a number of machines with many thousands of IP addresses using > the patch in PR#12071. It isn't as general a solution as using a hash > table to lookup interface aliases (as in NetBSD or BSDI) but it is > much more easy to manage one alias per CIDR block than 254 aliases per > /24 (say). > > Tony. > -- > let it be dot at The patch is interesting and seems efficient, and same kind of fix for IPv6 might also work. But my point is that, on public internet environment where global IPv4 addr is necessary, there is another issue of actual IPv4 addr shortage, isn't it? Yoshinobu Inoue To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message