> > I think your second alternative is untenable, since it would mean > > that a link name by itself (and thus an IP interface name by itself) > > is no longer unique across the system, > > The meaning of a link name will always be context dependant, else how > would a non-global zone be able to refer to "ip.tun0" and get to the > right link? (That being "zone1/ip.tun0", or whatever naming is used > to disambiguate).
Sorry, I meant to say "zone", not "system". In the global zone, "ip.tun0" would become ambiguous. That's the problem we'd like to avoid. > Also, deciding on an approach for naming doesn't answer some of the > other questions, for example whether assigning a link to a non-global > zone is subtractive to the namespace of the global zone (this helps > answer the question about the global zone attempting to create VLANs > on a link that is assigned to a non-global zone). Yes, I agree those are interesting questions :-) -- meem
