Daniel Lezcano <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >> Then you lose the ability for each namespace to have its own routing entries. >> Which implies that you'll have difficulties with devices that should exist >> and be visible in one namespace only (like tunnels), as they require IP >> addresses and route. > > I mean instead of having the route tables private to the namespace, the routes > have the information to which namespace they are associated.
Is this an implementation difference or is this a user visible difference? As an implementation difference this is sensible, as it is pretty insane to allocate hash tables at run time. As a user visible difference that affects semantics of the operations this is not something we want to do. Eric - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
