> But I don't see a need to have names created in the global zone be  
> removed from the global zone (or have their name changed) as a  
> result of the global zone giving ownership to another zone.

If the global zone creates a link with the name "foo0" and then  
assigns that link to a non-global zone, the global zone should be  
free to create a link with the name "foo0" (without the destruction  
of the original link). Without the namespace manipulation, how would  
this happen?

> There are two things that are not clear to me (because I haven't  
> thought about the tradeoffs)
>  - should we allow a ngz to vanity name links assigned to it by the  
> gz (it can vanity name the links it creates without any added  
> complexity I suspect)

I suspect 'no', as that would be confusing for the global zone  
administrator.

>  - whether the gz should be able to see (with some qualification to  
> the name) the links that are created in the ngz. (From the  
> ownership model it can't modify them, but it might be useful to see  
> that there is a "zoneA/aggr0" link created by zoneA.)

I think 'yes', as an observability aid.

>> DR is another generally thorny issue when it comes to links in zones.
>> Seems like one would have to shut down all of the zones using  
>> links above
>> a given device in order to DR that device out of the system, which is
>> unfortunate.  But fixing that would probably require a pretty big  
>> overhaul
>> of the way DR works (maybe to be modeled as a "link down"  
>> operation, as
>> we'd discussed a while ago).
>
> I think that Xen implicitly takes us down the 'link down' path in  
> any case, and exploiting that for all NIC DR seems like a  
> significant simplification to DR.

We could switch out the mac device that underlies a VNIC without  
removing the VNIC, but that isn't possible today.

dme.
-- 
David Edmondson, Solaris Engineering, http://dme.org



Reply via email to