From owner-freebsd-net@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Mar 2 12:22:03 2004 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-net@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E99F016A4CE; Tue, 2 Mar 2004 12:22:03 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail.tel.fer.hr (zg04-080.dialin.iskon.hr [213.191.137.81]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B394943D3F; Tue, 2 Mar 2004 12:22:01 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from zec@tel.fer.hr) Received: from marko-tp.katoda.net (marko@dhcp11.katoda.net [192.168.200.111]) by mail.tel.fer.hr (8.12.6/8.12.6) with ESMTP id i22KLsuP004239; Tue, 2 Mar 2004 21:21:55 +0100 (CET) (envelope-from zec@tel.fer.hr) From: Marko Zec To: "James Read" , "Bjoern A. Zeeb" , Date: Tue, 2 Mar 2004 21:21:13 +0100 User-Agent: KMail/1.5.4 References: <4043B6BA.B847F081@freebsd.org> <00d301c40089$8a035410$c000000a@jd2400> In-Reply-To: <00d301c40089$8a035410$c000000a@jd2400> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: <200403022121.15400.zec@tel.fer.hr> cc: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: My planned work on networking stack (vimage) X-BeenThere: freebsd-net@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Networking and TCP/IP with FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 02 Mar 2004 20:22:04 -0000 On Tuesday 02 March 2004 20:06, James Read wrote: > > I still have in mind that I would like to see vimage[1] in HEAD one > > day ... I think it would be a pretty cool feature to have. If one > > can keep this in mind when doing greater modelling on the network > > stack it might help the one who will - at some time - find the time > > to ingtegrate it. > > > > > > [1] http://www.tel.fer.hr/zec/BSD/vimage/index.html > > > > In my opinion, this would be a _VERY_ good 'feature' to add into the > system. As it stands there is minimal 'networking' in a jail from a > users point of view, and also an administrators view aswell (granted > this isnt exactly what jail was designed to do, and so on). This > could be more then an asset to the whole jail architecture, by > providing a clone-able network stack within jails. For instance, you > could then run programs/services like NFS etc from jail to jail > without having to lock down services offered from the jail 'host'. > > If this can in _any way_ be pushed/implemented (with minimal > distruption) so that is it in HEAD/CURRENT then its well on the way > to complementing what 'jail' does. The fact that the virtualization patches are highly disruptive by their nature seem to me as the #1 reason they might never become suitable for inclusion in the main tree. Namely, the basic idea is to replace (most of) the global symbols/variables throughout the entire network stack with their counterparts residing in "clonable" structures or resource containers. While such a concept doesn't introduce any real-life performance penalty worth mentioning, the real issue is that the compatibility / synchronization with any parallel or external code would be unavoidably lost once the patchset would be committed. However I might be wrong... It would be nice if a wider discussion could try to weight out all pros and cons and yield a consensus whether or not any vimage-style patches could have any future in the official FreeBSD tree... Cheers, Marko