On Wed, 1 Oct 2003, Rik van Riel wrote: > On Wed, 1 Oct 2003, Chris Wright wrote: > > > I believe a reasonable portion of vserver can become a security module, > > but there would clearly remain a need for some of the virtualization > > (e.g. hostname, etc.). > > I definately want to have as much as possible of vserver > using the normal security infrastructure, simply because > it will save the vserver maintainers a lot of work ;) >
I think virtualization is important/useful enough to warrant an API of it's own. It could be similar to LSM, e.g. allow pluggable virtualization modules, with no cost for the base kernel. - James -- James Morris <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
