On Tue, 2005-10-04 at 11:33, Felix Schulte wrote: > > Thats on purpose, having zones within zones would make things very > > complex and could put quite a strain on the security model. > Why? AFAIK this feature has been requested quite often.
Personally I've only heard it requested twice and never have I seen a use case that would warrant doing the work. Of course since the code is available you can implement it yourself or with a group of like minded people. You basically increase the complexity of the checking for cross zone "talking". For example should if ZoneA had ZoneA1 and ZoneA2 should ZoneA1 and ZoneA2 be allowed to talk ? What does this gain you over having ZoneA, ZoneB and ZoneC ? Is it just the administrative ability you need or is it that you really need ZoneA1 and ZoneA2 to be contained to subsets of ZoneA ? There is a big difference between this. It is probably best to continue this part of the conversation on [EMAIL PROTECTED] As such I've Bcc'd opensolaris-discuss and set replies to zones-discuss. -- Darren J Moffat _______________________________________________ opensolaris-discuss mailing list [email protected]
