David Edmondson wrote: > On Fri, Mar 09, 2007 at 01:47:51PM +0800, Cathy Zhou wrote: >> David Edmondson wrote: >>> On Wed, Mar 07, 2007 at 08:13:55PM +0800, Cathy Zhou wrote: >>>> What do you think? >>> I think that we agree on how the system should behave. >>> >>> What's left, perhaps, is to figure out the pieces in which this can be >>> delivered. >>> >>> Modifying the management of link namespace has to be done in one >>> chunk. That is, we shouldn't do the "ip.tun0 is a per-zone link name" >>> without also doing "physical links assigned a non-global zone >>> disappear from the global zone namespace". >>> >> What exactly you mean by "disappear from the global zone >> namespace". Does you mean the global zone cannot see it at all. > > Visible only when a "fully qualified" link name is used (i.e. one that > includes the zone, such as 'zone1/bge0'). > So today, one can do:
# dladm set-linkprop -t zoneid=foo bge1 # dladm reset-linkprop -t zoneid bge1 in a global zone to change or reset zoneid for a given link, even this link has been assigned to a exclusive zone. Do you suggest that we remove this support? - Cathy
