0n Tue, Jun 05, 2007 at 12:10:36PM -0700, Julian Elischer wrote:
> I have two different versions of the talk on video.
> The audio is a bit hard to hear but can still be understood.
> When my RealWork(TM) lets up I will finish transcribing them to
downloadable form.
Can you plea
Nikos Vassiliadis wrote:
Hello everybody,
Is the BSDCan 2007 talk by Marko Zec available
in audio form?
Nikos
___
freebsd-net@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-net
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROT
Hello everybody,
Is the BSDCan 2007 talk by Marko Zec available
in audio form?
Nikos
___
freebsd-net@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-net
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
Christian Kratzer wrote:
Hi,
On Wed, 10 Aug 2005, Jeremie Le Hen wrote:
On Wed, Aug 10, 2005 at 03:30:32PM +0200, Christian Kratzer wrote:
And of course IPv6 for jails is something that could propably be
solved
in a very clean way using virtual ip stacks as in Marcos patch.
I'll cook so
Hi,
On Wed, 10 Aug 2005, Jeremie Le Hen wrote:
On Wed, Aug 10, 2005 at 03:30:32PM +0200, Christian Kratzer wrote:
And of course IPv6 for jails is something that could propably be solved
in a very clean way using virtual ip stacks as in Marcos patch.
I'll cook something up that uses interface
On Wed, Aug 10, 2005 at 03:30:32PM +0200, Christian Kratzer wrote:
> >>And of course IPv6 for jails is something that could propably be solved
> >>in a very clean way using virtual ip stacks as in Marcos patch.
> >
> >I'll cook something up that uses interface groups and then you can judge
> >wheth
Hi,
On Wed, 10 Aug 2005, Andre Oppermann wrote:
Christian Kratzer wrote:
please consider that routing is not everything.
Routing is the primary scope of my IP work. It doesn't preclude Marko's
approach from being implemented and working as it does for 4.11.
I fully understand that you mos
Christian Kratzer wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> On Wed, 10 Aug 2005, Andre Oppermann wrote:
>
> > Jeremie Le Hen wrote:
> >> One of the most powerful criteria it provides is "fwmark" which allows
> >> to match against a mark stamped on the skbuff (their mbuf) by the
> >> firewall. This leads to the abilit
Hi,
On Wed, 10 Aug 2005, Andre Oppermann wrote:
Jeremie Le Hen wrote:
One of the most powerful criteria it provides is "fwmark" which allows
to match against a mark stamped on the skbuff (their mbuf) by the
firewall. This leads to the ability to route packets based on the
whole capabilities o
Jeremie Le Hen wrote:
>
> > I haven't fully explored all applications and possible tie-ins with
> > jails, virtual stacks etc. but it looks very interesting.
> >
> > For example I want to have multiple routing tables within the same
> > stack. These routing tables can be opaque or fall-through an
> I haven't fully explored all applications and possible tie-ins with
> jails, virtual stacks etc. but it looks very interesting.
>
> For example I want to have multiple routing tables within the same
> stack. These routing tables can be opaque or fall-through and match
> on the source and destina
Marko Zec wrote:
>
> On Tuesday 09 August 2005 14:41, Andre Oppermann wrote:
> ...
> > I don't want to have non-global interface lists in the kernel.
>
> But sooner or later you _will_ end up with some sort of non-global
> interface lists after all, just as you stated yourself at the beginning
>
On Tuesday 09 August 2005 14:41, Andre Oppermann wrote:
> Marko Zec wrote:
> > On Monday 08 August 2005 18:47, Andre Oppermann wrote:
> > > Marko Zec wrote:
> > > > On Monday 08 August 2005 12:32, Andre Oppermann wrote:
...
> > > > > There is a patch doing that for FreeBSD 4.x. However while
> > >
taking some sacrifices in terms of the scope
> of minimum required modifications.
>
As I am no network code guru, I can only tell from reading presentation papers
and some material on this issue virtualisation as done by Marko meets most of
above mentioned criteria already. I would l
Julian Elischer wrote:
> On Thu, 24 Oct 2002, Marko Zec wrote:
>
> > Julian Elischer wrote:
> >
> >
> > > 11/ why was ng_bridge unsuitable for your use?
> >
> > Both the native and netgraph bridging code, I believe, were designed with
> > the presumption that only one "upper" hook is really needed
On Thu, 24 Oct 2002, Marko Zec wrote:
> Julian Elischer wrote:
>
>
> > 11/ why was ng_bridge unsuitable for your use?
>
> Both the native and netgraph bridging code, I believe, were designed with
> the presumption that only one "upper" hook is really needed to establish the
> communication to
on /proc (procfs, local)
/usr on /usr (null, local, read-only)
%
> 9/ how does VIPA differ from the JAIL address binding?
Actually, VIPA feature should be considered completely independent of
network stack virtualization work. The jail address is usually bound to an
alias address configured
I'm very impressed. I do however have some questions.
(I have not read the code yet, just the writeup)
1/ How do you cope with each machine expecting to have it's own loopback
interface? Is it sufficient to make lo1 lo2 lo3 etc. and attache them
to the appropriate VMs?
2/ How much would be gaine
Bill Coutinho wrote:
> Sean Chittenden, in FreeBSD-Arch list, pointed me to your "BSD network stack
> virtualization" site.
>
> What I'm trying to achieve is one box with many independent "virtual
> servers" (using the Jail subsystem), but with each vistu
"J. 'LoneWolf' Mattsson" wrote:
> At 08:59 17/10/2002 +0200, Ruben van Staveren wrote:
> >Isn't this something that can overcome the current shortcomings of jail(2) ?
> >(the no other stacks/no raw sockets problem)
It should be possible even to run multiple jails within each virtual image, if
one
At 08:59 17/10/2002 +0200, Ruben van Staveren wrote:
>Isn't this something that can overcome the current shortcomings of jail(2) ?
>(the no other stacks/no raw sockets problem)
I've been tempted at looking into jail-ifying raw sockets as well, but time
has precluded me from doing so (and from tr
Isn't this something that can overcome the current shortcomings of jail(2) ?
(the no other stacks/no raw sockets problem)
- Ruben
--
,-_ ..
/() ) | Ruben van Staveren http://ruben.is.verweg.com/ |_o
(__ ( |M
Hi all,
on http://www.tel.fer.hr/zec/BSD/vimage/ you can find the patches
against 4.7-RELEASE kernel sources, which provide the functionality of
maintaining multiple independent network stack images within a single
operating system kernel. No userland patches are necessary, except an
additional v
23 matches
Mail list logo
