Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next] [RFC] netns: enable cross-ve Unix sockets

From: Daniel Lezcano <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 01 Oct 2008 15:50:07 +0200

Cedric Le Goater wrote:
> Pavel Emelyanov wrote:
>> Daniel Lezcano wrote:
>>> Pavel Emelyanov wrote:
>>>>> So there are 2 cases:
>>>>>   * full isolation : restriction on VPS
>>>>>   * partial isolation : no restriction but *perhaps* problem when migrating
>>>>>
>>>>> Looks like we need an option per namespace to reduce the isolation for 
>>>>> af_unix sockets :)
>>>>>   - on (default): current behaviour => full isolation
>>>>>   - off : partial isolation
>>>> You mean some sysctl, that enables/disables this check in unix_find_socket_byinode?
>>> Yes.
>> OK. Den, please, do :)
> 
> hmm, would that allow sibling namespaces to connect to each other ? If so, 
> I'm not in favor of such a solution. 
> 
> I understand the need. we had a similar issue with the command line tool 
> pgsl. Could we work something out with the capabilities ? or make an 
> exception if your ->nsproxy->net_ns == init_net ? 

Why capabilities is better than a simple sysctl ?
Making an exception for init_net will break the nested containers no ?