Date: Sun, 25 May 2003 18:38:01 -0700 From: Jordan K Hubbard <jkh@queasyweasel.com> To: Marko Zec <zec@tel.fer.hr> Cc: net@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Network stack cloning / virtualization patches Message-ID: <AFE09C72-8F1A-11D7-A011-000393BB9222@queasyweasel.com> In-Reply-To: <3ED15D6F.1BF1BB37@tel.fer.hr>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
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. -- Jordan K. Hubbard Engineering Manager, BSD technology group Apple Computer
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?AFE09C72-8F1A-11D7-A011-000393BB9222>