From: Herbert Poetzl (herbert_at_13thfloor.at)
Date: Fri 27 Feb 2004 - 17:37:30 GMT
On Fri, Feb 27, 2004 at 12:42:07PM +0200, Alex Lyashkov wrote:
> ? ???, 27.02.2004, ? 11:54, Thomas Gelf ?????:
> > Hi Alex,
> > I've had a look at freevps (just downloaded the source, didn't try it
> > out). vifconfig seems to be a very cool thing, do you consider it
> > possible to adapt somthing like that to the linux-vserver project?
> What is adapt to the linux-vsever project ? porting ?
> For it need port all my network patches and change some structure linux
> vserver core. If Herbert do it....
you are very welcome to help with that ...
as a matter of fact, I was hoping that you and Say
would do the 2.6 networking stuff for linux-vserver
> > I believe that creating freevps was a great work, but I prefer the
> > vserver project for the following reasons:
> > - I'll not go to use a redhad-like 2.4.18-x kernel on my debian servers,
> > I prefer patches to the latest stable kernel, I'm using 2.4.25 at the
> > moment and I'll switch to v2.6 as soon as possible, at the moment I'm
> > missig support for ctx-based disklimits in kernel v2.6
> 2.4.18-27 more 2.5/2.6 when 2.4. It`s kernel based on -ac patchset.
> Whis many fixes and additions.
> Next release be based on RH AS -9.0.1 kernel at current do adapt new
> memory accounting to his mm subsystem.
well nothing wrong with focusing on one distro for
one arch, but linux-vserver should be arch and distro
> > - linux-vserver is a community project and this community seems to be
> > very active!
> I see at last time community only finding Herberts errors :-\
maybe this means that your software doesn't have any
bugs to find, maybe it's jsut perfect ;)
> > In my opinion the best way for both projects would be to merge now, as
> > both projects are undergoing deep changes for kernel v2.6 (has been
> > discussed earlier on this list):
> > - find a common solution for the networking stuff, I prefer the FreeVPS
> > way
> > - find a common way for handling ctx-based disk/memory-limits and quotas
> > - ...
> > Am Fre, den 27.02.2004 schrieb Alex Lyashkov um 09:11:
> > > ? ???, 27.02.2004, ? 10:03, Thomas Gelf ?????:
> > > > is it possible to realize this?
> > > > how much work would it be?
> > > >
> > > > the first part (tun/tap interface == virtual eth0 inside the vserver,
> > > > bridge them to real eth0, allow CAP_NET_ADMIN for the visible interfaces
> > > > only) should be no problem, what about per-context routing/firewalling?
> > > >
> > > VServer not have it.
> Alex Lyashkov <umka_at_sevinter.net>
> Vserver mailing list
Vserver mailing list