From owner-freebsd-net@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Jan 30 14:36:41 2012 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-net@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BD6251065674 for ; Mon, 30 Jan 2012 14:36:41 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from freebsd-net@m.gmane.org) Received: from plane.gmane.org (plane.gmane.org [80.91.229.3]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 797F28FC0C for ; Mon, 30 Jan 2012 14:36:41 +0000 (UTC) Received: from list by plane.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1RrsLV-0006cd-Rz for freebsd-net@freebsd.org; Mon, 30 Jan 2012 15:36:37 +0100 Received: from lara.cc.fer.hr ([161.53.72.113]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Mon, 30 Jan 2012 15:36:37 +0100 Received: from ivoras by lara.cc.fer.hr with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Mon, 30 Jan 2012 15:36:37 +0100 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ To: freebsd-net@freebsd.org From: Ivan Voras Date: Mon, 30 Jan 2012 15:36:25 +0100 Lines: 23 Message-ID: References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: lara.cc.fer.hr User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; FreeBSD amd64; rv:9.0) Gecko/20120110 Thunderbird/9.0 In-Reply-To: Cc: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] multiple instances of ipfw(4) X-BeenThere: freebsd-net@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Networking and TCP/IP with FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 30 Jan 2012 14:36:41 -0000 On 30/01/2012 13:01, Ermal Luçi wrote: > Surely i know that this is not the best way to implement generically ... probably, because it's similar to VNET... > What i would like to know is if there is interest to see such > functionality in FreeBSD? > > I am asking first to see if there is some consensus about this as a > feature, needed or not! > If interest is shown i will transform the patch to allow: > - ipfw(8) to manage the contextes create/destroy > - ipfw(8) to manage interface membership. Closing the race of two > parallell clients modifying different contextes. > It is quite handy feature, which can be exploited even to scale on SMP > machines by extending it to bind a specific instance(with its > interaces) to a specific CPU/core?! ... which is also done by VNET+JAILS. You should probably port it to VNET :)