From owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG  Sat Feb  7 15:51:39 2009
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 107FD106574B;
	Sat,  7 Feb 2009 15:51:39 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from marck@rinet.ru)
Received: from woozle.rinet.ru (woozle.rinet.ru [195.54.192.68])
	by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7CDA68FC18;
	Sat,  7 Feb 2009 15:51:37 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from marck@rinet.ru)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by woozle.rinet.ru (8.14.3/8.14.3) with ESMTP id n17FpaYn001004;
	Sat, 7 Feb 2009 18:51:36 +0300 (MSK) (envelope-from marck@rinet.ru)
Date: Sat, 7 Feb 2009 18:51:36 +0300 (MSK)
From: Dmitry Morozovsky <marck@rinet.ru>
To: Robert Watson <rwatson@freebsd.org>
In-Reply-To: <alpine.BSF.2.00.0902062245490.89719@fledge.watson.org>
Message-ID: <alpine.BSF.2.00.0902071850130.21613@woozle.rinet.ru>
References: <alpine.BSF.2.00.0901290021000.91263@woozle.rinet.ru>
	<alpine.BSF.2.00.0901290855010.70708@fledge.watson.org>
	<alpine.BSF.2.00.0901291237020.91263@woozle.rinet.ru>
	<alpine.BSF.2.00.0902062245490.89719@fledge.watson.org>
User-Agent: Alpine 2.00 (BSF 1167 2008-08-23)
X-NCC-RegID: ru.rinet
X-OpenPGP-Key-ID: 6B691B03
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
X-Greylist: Sender IP whitelisted, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.0.1
	(woozle.rinet.ru [0.0.0.0]); Sat, 07 Feb 2009 18:51:36 +0300 (MSK)
Cc: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: jail: external and localhost distinction
X-BeenThere: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: Production branch of FreeBSD source code <freebsd-stable.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable>, 
	<mailto:freebsd-stable-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-stable>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-stable@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-stable-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable>,
	<mailto:freebsd-stable-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 07 Feb 2009 15:51:40 -0000

On Fri, 6 Feb 2009, Robert Watson wrote:

RW> > Thank you for clarification, now I see this is actually expected behaviour
RW> > :)
RW> > 
RW> > Would then starting second jail with the same root and, say, 127.10.0.1 as
RW> > an address be a workaround?
RW> 
RW> There's no technical reason you can't have more than one jail using the same
RW> file system root, and even IP -- you'll find that ps(1) in one jail can't
RW> see processes in the other (and can't signal, etc) but otherwise works as
RW> expected.  Of course, any given process has to be a member of at most one of
RW> the two.

But, in the case of IP sharing, I suppose, the second process tries to bind to 
the same port will got "socket already in use", won't it?


-- 
Sincerely,
D.Marck                                     [DM5020, MCK-RIPE, DM3-RIPN]
[ FreeBSD committer:                                 marck@FreeBSD.org ]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
*** Dmitry Morozovsky --- D.Marck --- Wild Woozle --- marck@rinet.ru ***
------------------------------------------------------------------------