Re: sys_vserver

[James Morris]

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
<jmorris@xxxxxxxxxx>


-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/