Dmitry Mishin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > On Monday 11 September 2006 18:57, Herbert Poetzl wrote: >> I completely agree here, we need a separate namespace >> for that, so that we can combine isolation and virtualization >> as needed, unless the bind restrictions can be completely >> expressed with an additional mangle or filter table (as >> was suggested) > > iptables are designed for packet flow decisions and filtering, it has nothing > common with bind restrictions. So, it may be only packet flow > scheduling/filtering, but it will not help to resolve bind-time IP conflicts.
Please read the archive, where the suggestion was made. What was suggested was a new table, with it's own set of chains. So we could make filtering decisions on where sockets could be bound. That is not a far stretch from where iptables is today. Do you have some concrete arguments against the proposal? 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
