new feature: private IPC for every jail

[Marc G. Fournier]

On Mon, 3 Apr 2006, Robert Watson wrote:

> So the question is this: if you load System V IPC support after you 
> start a jail, how do we handle jails that have already started? Do we go 
> out and create new name spaces for jails already started (a problem for 
> method (1), because it implies System V IPC will have pretty intimate 
> knowledge of jails, and know how to walk lists, etc), do we deny access 
> to System V IPC for jails not present when it was loaded?  Likewise, 
> although we tend to refer to the different IPC mechanisms as in a single 
> category, System V IPC, there are actually three name spaces, and the 
> functionality for each can be loaded separately.

Stupid question, but why does a namespace need to be created prior to a 
process in the jail needing it?  "if jail requests IPC, and IPC is loaded, 
then create namespace at that point" ... ?

----
Marc G. Fournier           Hub.Org Networking Services (http://www.hub.org)
Email: scrappy at hub.org           Yahoo!: yscrappy              ICQ: 7615664