From: chenweilong <chenweilong@huawei•com>
To: Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@gmail•com>
Cc: <kaber@trash•net>, <davem@davemloft•net>,
<netdev@vger•kernel.org>,
Nicolas Dichtel <nicolas.dichtel@6wind•com>
Subject: Re: [patch net-next] vlan: Don't allow vlan devices to change network namespaces.
Date: Wed, 23 Apr 2014 10:40:12 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <5357280C.1000404@huawei.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1398176819.29946.49.camel@edumazet-glaptop2.roam.corp.google.com>
On 2014/4/22 22:26, Eric Dumazet wrote:
> On Tue, 2014-04-22 at 20:43 +0800, Chen Weilong wrote:
>> From: Weilong Chen <chenweilong@huawei•com>
>>
>> Like bonding, vlan as netdevice doesn't cross netns boundaries.
>>
>> Vlan port and vlan itself live in same netns.
>
> Please explain why you believe it should be like that.
>
> bonding and vlan have quite different purpose, so your changelog is
> quite obscure.
>
> We had a discussion like this one with macvlan, and prior patch was
> rejected.
>
>
>
>
This idea comes from the different result of two changing namespace orders.
Test on eth1 and its vlan eth1.5, move them form default ns to a new ns called net0.
1.move eth1 first,and then eth1.5;
2.move eth1.5 first, and then eth1;
As a network manager, I will be happy they both work, I don't care about the orders.
But, 1) doesn't work, if eth1 was moved to other ns, all related vlans were unregisted.
you need to create a new eth1.5 in net0.
And, 2) is not safe, if someone forgets to move eth1, eth1.5 will not work, making
things complex.
So what's the better order ?
I prefer 1), when a vlan dev is setup, it has a namespace, and belongs to it,
When somebody moves it, it should say 'hey boy, don't move me,I like here :0'
Thanks,
Weilong
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2014-04-23 2:40 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2014-04-22 12:43 [patch net-next] vlan: Don't allow vlan devices to change network namespaces Chen Weilong
2014-04-22 12:54 ` Nicolas Dichtel
2014-04-22 14:26 ` Eric Dumazet
2014-04-23 2:40 ` chenweilong [this message]
2014-04-23 7:23 ` Nicolas Dichtel
2014-04-24 0:59 ` chenweilong
2014-04-24 5:47 ` Michal Kubecek
2014-04-24 7:01 ` Nicolas Dichtel
2014-04-24 11:32 ` chenweilong
2014-04-24 12:41 ` chenweilong
2014-04-24 13:21 ` Nicolas Dichtel
2014-04-25 10:23 ` chenweilong
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=5357280C.1000404@huawei.com \
--to=chenweilong@huawei$(echo .)com \
--cc=davem@davemloft$(echo .)net \
--cc=eric.dumazet@gmail$(echo .)com \
--cc=kaber@trash$(echo .)net \
--cc=netdev@vger$(echo .)kernel.org \
--cc=nicolas.dichtel@6wind$(echo .)com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox