Thanks for clarifying. It seems that the general issue is the management of the namespace of links in a zoned environment. The IP tunnel re-whack makes that interesting because it's a case where a non-global zone is expected to create links and therefore be additive to the namespace. (IP tunnels, a layer 3 concept, appearing at layer 2 is a separate topic for conversation :-).)
In the current implementation it's the case that a link exists before it is assigned to a zone, so the link is already represented in the namespace of the global zone. Will Clearview + IP Instances allow a non-global zone administrator to change the name of a link that is assigned to the non-global zone? Your suggestion, viewed in this light, suggests that the link namespace should be "per zone", which seems right. Maybe a necessary consequence of this is that the global zone cannot manipulate links that are part of a non-global zone's namespace. It also makes me wonder about whether links that are assigned to a non-global zone should become "exclusive" to that zone - they are removed from the global zone namespace. To facilitate zone migration it would also be useful to explore genericising[1] the link names used by a zone (i.e. switch to "link0", "link1"). The "two level" namespace could be a way out of this (prefix the link name with that of the zone, or perhaps just a "zone" specifier as an argument to link namespace manipulation tools). [1] Too much time spent in the US. dme.
