Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Tue, 09 Nov 1999 18:37:32 +0100
From:      Poul-Henning Kamp <phk@critter.freebsd.dk>
To:        Yoshinobu Inoue <shin@nd.net.fujitsu.co.jp>
Cc:        jhay@mikom.csir.co.za, freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG, freebsd-security@FreeBSD.ORG
Subject:   Re: Should jail treat ip-number? 
Message-ID:  <24337.942169052@critter.freebsd.dk>
In-Reply-To: Your message of "Wed, 10 Nov 1999 02:28:52 %2B0900." <19991110022852N.shin@nd.net.fujitsu.co.jp> 

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
In message <19991110022852N.shin@nd.net.fujitsu.co.jp>, Yoshinobu Inoue writes:

>(1)It seems to me that once an IP# is specified for a jail,
>   then that IP# should not be re-specified for another jail.
>   Is this true?

Generally yes, although nothing in the code tries to (nor should
it try to) enforce it.

>(2)If (1) is true, then number of jail is restricted to the
>   number of IP address assigned to that machine.
>   Then IPv6 support for jail should be very good thing,
>   because extremely many IP addresses become available for
>   a machine with IPv6. (which is not with IPv4)

I'm not against adding IPv6 functionality to jail(2), my point is
merely that until somebody who has sufficient time & ability to 
fiddle with it does it, it's not going to happen.

The usual rule applies:

"Great idea, why don't you send me patches which does this ?"

--
Poul-Henning Kamp             FreeBSD coreteam member
phk@FreeBSD.ORG               "Real hackers run -current on their laptop."
FreeBSD -- It will take a long time before progress goes too far!


To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-security" in the body of the message




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?24337.942169052>