Fwd: Status update on 1.0

[Kristofer Buffington <kristoferbuffington@gmail.com>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1764 bytes --]

Woops, I meant to send this message to the list

---------- Forwarded message ---------
From: Kristofer Buffington <kristoferbuffington@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, Mar 20, 2019 at 8:51 PM
Subject: Re: Status update on 1.0
To: Gábor Boskovits <boskovits@gmail.com>


I'm deep into this netlink/rtnetlink business currently. I'm trying to
decide if it's better to use guile-ffi or if it's just easier to use bash
scripts and iproute2. Then virtual network interfaces could map to specific
containerized services, which is my objective. Long-term, the netlink and
rtnetlink fii is the superior approach. But bash scripts could get us
something hacky, but running quickly.

My other curiosity is: would it make more sense for shepherd to generate
virtual network namespaces when services spawn, or is that something the
operating-system declaration should contain?

I'd love to help. I'm on the verge of putting some code down now that the
research is coalescing into a vision. If there's some guidance or
suggestions or otherwise, please try to get me involved!

Kristofer Buffington

On Fri, Mar 15, 2019 at 3:35 PM Gábor Boskovits <boskovits@gmail.com> wrote:

> Hello,
>
> Thompson, David <dthompson2@worcester.edu> ezt írta (időpont: 2019.
> márc. 15., P, 19:32):
> >
>
> > Quick tangent: My memory is a bit fuzzy, but I think that netlink API
> > wrappers would put us one step closer to being able to implement
> > useful network isolation in our container implementation (right now
> > you only have loopback, not so fun), like what Docker can do. Just
> > something to consider. :)
> >
> > - Dave
> >
>
> Yes, that is correct. This is exactly one of the reasons I considered this.
>
> Best regards,
> g_bor
>
>

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 2575 bytes --]