On Thu, Dec 01, 2016 at 09:42:57AM +0100, Michal Privoznik wrote: > On 30.11.2016 11:41, Michal Privoznik wrote: > > On 30.11.2016 11:16, Daniel P. Berrange wrote: > >> On Wed, Nov 30, 2016 at 10:59:35AM +0100, Michal Privoznik wrote: > >>> So far the NSS module looks up only hostnames as provided by > >>> guests themselves. However, there are some cases where this is > >>> not enough: e.g. when there's a fresh new guest being installed > >>> (with some generic hostname) say from a live ISO image; or some > >>> (older) systems don't advertise their hostname in DHCP > >>> transactions at all. > >>> In cases like that it would be helpful if we translate domain > >>> name as seen by libvirt too so that users can: > >>> > >>> # virsh start $dom && ssh $dom > >>> > >>> Signed-off-by: Michal Privoznik <mpriv...@redhat.com> > >> > >> So, IIUC, with this change the nss module is able to lookup > >> based on hostname *or* the guest name. > > > > Correct. If you have a libvirt domain 'fedora' but set its hostname to > > 'fedora2', both 'ping fedora' and 'ping fedora2' will work (and result > > in the same IP address). Without this patch just 'ping fedora2' would work. > > > >> I think it is desirable if the admin can control which is > >> used. In particular as an admin I'd like to prevent the > >> ability to use hostname at all, since this data may > >> come from an untrustworthy guest. > > > > Which can happen on a real network too. Guests can initialize DHCP > > transaction with spoofed hostname just to trick DNS. If admins don't > > want this to happen they just configure static DHCP/DNS. With libvirt, > > they don't enable the NSS module. > > > > > >> IOW, should we actually create two separate NSS modules, > >> one that does DHCP hostname based lookups and one that > >> does guest name based lookups. Admins can then choose > >> which to use, or even list both in nssswitch.conf > > > > I was thinking about this and honestly, I don't have preference. I could > > argue both ways. Ideally, there would be a way to pass arguments to an > > NSS module, but looks like there is none. I've seen the following in > > nsswitch.conf: > > > > netmasks: nisplus [NOTFOUND=return] files > > > > which would suggest so, but digging deep into glibc those are just args > > to glibc function that loads the modules and calls the functions from them. > > > > So yes, maybe we need two modules after all. Any suggestions on the > > naming? I'm out of ideas. > > Just an idea: what if I rename the current module to libvirt_guest (and > also install symlink named libvirt that would point to it - just to > maintain backward compatibility). And this new module would be called > libvirt_host. So that we would have: > > libvirt_guest: to resolve IP addresses based on what guests say > libvirt_host: to resolve IP addresses based on what libvirt thinks the > guest name is. > > Still crappy names though.
I don't think naming hugely matters as long as we document which does what. Personally I'd go for "libvirt-dhcp" (DHCP recorded name) and "libvirt-guest" (Libvirt guest name), or just leave the current one called libvirt forever. Regards, Daniel -- |: http://berrange.com -o- http://www.flickr.com/photos/dberrange/ :| |: http://libvirt.org -o- http://virt-manager.org :| |: http://entangle-photo.org -o- http://search.cpan.org/~danberr/ :| -- libvir-list mailing list firstname.lastname@example.org https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/libvir-list