On Mon, 15 Jun 2015 09:53:53 +0000, "Bjoern A. Zeeb" <bzeeb-li...@lists.zabbadoz.net> wrote: > Hi, > > removed hackers, added virtualization. > > >> On 12 Jun 2015, at 01:17 , kikuc...@uranus.dti.ne.jp wrote: >> >> Hello, >> >> I’m (still) trying to figure out how jail-aware SysV IPC mechanism should be. > > The best way probably is to finally get the “common” VIMAGE framework into > HEAD to allow easy virtualisation of other services. That work has been > sitting in perforce for a few years and simply needs updating for sysctls I > think. > > Then use that to virtualise things and have a vipc like we have vnets. The > good news is that you have identified most places and have the cleanup > functions already so it’d be a matter of transforming your changes (assuming > they are correct and working fine; haven’t actually read the patch in > detail;-) to the different infrastructure. And that’s the easiest part. > > > Bjoern
Hi Bjoern, Thank you for your reply. The "common" VIMAGE framework sounds good, I really want it. I want to know what the IPC system looks like for user-land after virtualized, and what happen if vnet like vipc is implemented. For example, jail 1, 2, 3 join vipc group A, and jail 4, 5, 6 join vipc group B ?? Hmm, it looks good. Regards, Kikuchan _______________________________________________ email@example.com mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-virtualization To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-virtualization-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"