Date: Mon, 26 May 2003 18:54:04 +0200 From: Marko Zec <zec@tel.fer.hr> To: Jordan K Hubbard <jkh@queasyweasel.com> Cc: net@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Network stack cloning / virtualization patches Message-ID: <3ED246AC.483FE6F4@tel.fer.hr> References: <AFE09C72-8F1A-11D7-A011-000393BB9222@queasyweasel.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Jordan K Hubbard wrote: > On Sunday, May 25, 2003, at 05:18 PM, Marko Zec wrote: > > > So, I'd certainly like to virtualize more system resources and make > > virtual images as independent from each other as possible, but they > > will always > > have to share the same kernel. > > That's actually what I was talking about - my comparison to what IBM's > done may have been a bad example since, as you say, they've virtualized > the hardware in true IBM (shades of VM) fashion. I think that's > actually overkill for many usage scenarios since all you really want is > the ability to run an "instance" of the OS which allows for all the > user-visible configuration knobs to be changed and the appropriate > user-visible resource limits to be enforced independently. Essentially > a jail where it's literally impossible to tell that you're not the only > "OS" on the machine or to affect a user or resource running on another > instance. Btw. there is a commercial product out there that also seems to offer such a functionality, check http://www.sw-soft.com/en/products/virtuozzo/ Marko
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?3ED246AC.483FE6F4>